M67854-18-R-7600_-_Attachment_8_-_QASP.pdf

M67854-18-R-7600 Attachment 8

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

GCSS-MC PDSS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS 2

4 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6 REVIEWS AND RESOLUTION……………………………………………………………. .5

ATTACHMENT 1: QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

ATTACHMENT 2: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (RFP ATT 9)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) establishes methods for monitoring and surveilling the contractor’s performance of the requirement in the performance work statement

(PWS) entitled GCSS-MC/LCM Increment 1 PDSS. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines GCSS-Marine Corps will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance and quality assurance documentation requirements,

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance).

This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by GCSS-MC PMO to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors.

The contractor’s quality control program will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS.

1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes to any documents.

2 GOVERNMENT RESOURCES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the COR and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time COR as the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The contracting officer’s representative (COR) is an individual appointed in writing by the

Contracting Officer for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s technical performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf.

Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The designation will contain the scope of responsibilities

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY

LEVELS

The Performance Requirements Summary is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the surveillance methods the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file. Performance standards define the desired outcomes. Acceptable

Quality Level defines the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance.

Surveillance Methods - Surveillance of Contractor performance is the method used by the

Government to determine whether the Contractor is effectively and efficiently complying with all terms and conditions of the contract. The COR plays a critical role in adequately evaluating

Contractor performance. The methods of surveillance listed below will be used in as indicated with the performance standards delineated by PWS element in the Performance Requirements

Summary.

Analysis. A qualification method that is carried out by examining and assessing the application of techniques in order to determine if they are appropriate and sufficient.

The quality of performance can be determined from Government or Contractor task-based or Management Information System (MIS) reports; Contractor ISO 9000 techniques and procedures; or from Government observation of completed tasks. In some instances, reports may be available in the form of information on a Contractor's performance against contract requirements. Reports generally provide information regarding various characteristics of tasks and can, therefore, be used to determine acceptability of a Contractor's performance.

Inspections. A qualitative method that can be accomplished through one of the following techniques:

o Random Sampling: With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained. Stratified sampling focuses on selected parts of total Contractor output for sampling. Computer programs may be available to assist in establishing sampling procedures.

o Periodic Inspection, Judgmental Inspection, or Planned Sampling: This method, sometimes called "planned sampling,” consists of the evaluation of tasks selected on other than a 100% or random basis.

o 100% Inspection: This method includes a full review and evaluation of all outputs required.

Direct Observation: This method includes the physical observation of task performance and the required outcome.

Customer Complaints (Customer Feedback): The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction.

Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints. Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor. Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will investigate and make a determination of the complaint is valid or not. If considered valid, the contractor shall provide a resolution. Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the monitoring form in Attachment 1. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results of in the PRS are achieved.

5. ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

5.1 Monitoring: The Government will use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.

5.2 Monthly Reporting: The COR for each task order will prepare a written report for summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the contractor’s submitted monthly report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 1), will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

5.3 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS): In addition to the monthly monitoring, the Government will assess the contractor’s overall performance on a task order basis using CPARS. At the conclusion of each task order, a CPARS rating will be created using the following definitions

Performance

Rating

Criteria

Excellent /

Outstanding

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub- element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub- element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

6. REVIEWS AND RESOLUTION

The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO and other government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

Issues and concerns of both parties

Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

ATTACHMENT 1: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM

(Subject to Change at Government Discretion)

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________