N00019-19-R-0017_SCRM_attch3_QASP_3Dec18.docx

JSF QASP

F-35 Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose. In accordance with FAR 46.103 the purpose of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to identify the methods and procedures the Government will use to evaluate contractor performance while concurrently determining the contractor is meeting the mission essential elements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The QASP is designed to provide an effective surveillance method by monitoring contractor performance for each listed performance objective in the Performance Requirements Summary (See Section 7).

1.1.1 .The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the services the Contractor is required to perform as specified in the PWS and the contract proposal.

1.1.2. The QASP is developed by the requiring activity. It is designed to provide direction to personnel performing contractor surveillance activities. Personnel surveying the contract terms and conditions and PWS requirements will periodically review the QASP throughout the life of the contract.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

2.1. Government. The role of the Government in quality assurance is to ensure the Contractor is performing in accordance with the contract requirements and that contract standards are achieved.

2.2. Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer (CO) is responsible for safeguarding the interests of the United States Government in contractual relationships. Only the CO is authorized to bind the Government and then, only to the extent of the authority entrusted to them through the issuance of a warrant.

2.2.1. The CO designates authority for inspection and/or acceptance responsibilities to the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) – or delegates authority to another certified acquisition professional - in accordance with the FAR/DFARS. This documented authority allows the COR, or other certified acquisition professionals, to act on the CO’s behalf.

2.2.2. The CO informs the Contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all quality assurance personnel assigned to the contract.

2.3. Contracting Officer Representative (COR). The COR when designated:

2.3.1. The COR serves as the eyes and ears for the CO at the Contractor’s site.

2.3.2. The COR monitors contractor performance to ensure contract requirements are met for: Performance, Cost, and Schedule.

2.3.3. The COR ensures that contract quality requirements, provisions, standards, and thresholds are defined, practical, enforceable, necessary, and verifiable.

2.3.4. The COR evaluates and documents contractor performance in accordance with this QASP and the PWS.

2.3.5. The COR notifies the CO of any significant performance deficiencies using a Contractor Discrepancy Report with supporting documentation.

2.3.6. The COR maintains surveillance documentation.

2.3.7. The COR recommends improvements to the QASP and PWS throughout the life of the contract.

2.3.8 The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

3.1. Scope of Work. The F-35 JPO relies heavily on Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney to provide insight into Sustainment Supply Chain risks for the Air System. The F-35 JPO has a good understanding of Lockheed Martin, Pratt & Whitney, and their major suppliers; however, there is often limited visibility into the sub-tier suppliers that provide critical components and personnel supporting sustainment. The JPO desires the capability to better understand the risks presented by key components and organizations in the F-35 Sustainment Supply Chain that could impact the overall program cost, schedule, and performance.

4.0 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

4.1. Quality Control Program. The Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. Details of these controls will be documented in the contractor’s Quality Control Plan.

4.2. Level of Performance Evaluation. Government customers will provide an independent performance evaluation monthly reflecting how the Contractor is performing against their respective task order. The monthly assessments will be utilized to complete Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR). Any discrepancies will be brought to the attention of the CO.

4.3. Timely Feedback to Contractor: Timely feedback to the Contractor on unacceptable performance will be provided by the COR and documented in writing. Prompt feedback is essential so that the Contractor can develop and implement a corrective action plan. The Contractor's corrective action must be reported to the Contracting Officer for tracking purposes.

5.0 SURVEILLANCE

The COR will perform monthly surveillance based on the quality and effectiveness of the Contractor’s data deliverables as well as the services provided. Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the Contractor's quality manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR, when designated, shall be responsible for monitoring the Contractor’s performance in meeting specific performance standards. The COR(s) assigned to perform surveillance of the Contractor’s performance manages a Surveillance Folder for each of their task order(s) assigned. The folder has the following divisions:

5.0.1. COR appointment letter, CO letter of designation, and Training Record.

5.0.2. PWS and other pertinent parts of the contract.

5.0.3. Surveillance Plan.

5.0.4. Surveillance Reports / Performance Metrics Surveys

5.0.5. Other applicable documentation, such as: (1) Customer and user comments and (2) Data and technical reports.

5.1. Surveillance methods. The assigned COR, with potential input from the Technical Point of Contact (TPOC)/Alternate Technical Point of Contact (ATPOC)/User, will use the surveillance methods detailed below:

a. USER SURVEY. (Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling. Random survey is conducted to solicit user satisfaction. Appropriate for high quantity activities that have historically been satisfactory. May also generate periodic and 100% inspections.)

b. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Highly applicable to services provided in quantity and where quality is highly subjective.)

c. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all outputs. Most applicable to small quantity, but highly important services. May be used where there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.)

5.2. Unacceptable Performance. If the number of complaints/defects exceeds the performance threshold for any performance objective, the COR will determine the possible cause of this unacceptable performance. Government-caused complaints/defects will not be counted against the Contractor. The same applies to any other requirement of the contract when Government-caused complaints/defects are the cause of unacceptable contractor performance. If the Contractor’s performance is judged unacceptable for any requirement by the COR, the COR will document the discrepancy as a non-conformance and inform the Contracting Officer (if needed) for resolution. Significant (major non-conformance) performance deficiencies must be submitted to the Contracting Officer using a Contractor Discrepancy Report and include supporting documentation.

6.0 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS

CDRL

NUMBER

Paragraph

FREQUENCY

A001

Kick-off Meeting Agenda and Presentation

3.1 Once / 3 Business Days prior to Kick-off meeting

A002

Quarterly Status Report

3.2

Quarterly

7.0 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

7.1. Overview. The PRS details and identifies the contractor requirements by performance objectives that relate directly to mission essential elements from the PWS. The performance threshold describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each contractor requirement. These thresholds define minimum acceptance standards critical to mission success. Various methods of surveillance exist to monitor performance; see Section 5.1. Each task order will have a detailed PRS.

7.2. Performance Evaluation. Performance of a service will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the performance threshold. Revising and resubmitting the documentation at no cost to the Government is the preferred method for correcting unacceptable performance. The Contractor shall provide the Government a written response as to why the performance threshold was not met, how performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how recurrence of the cause will be prevented in the future.

7.3. Performance Objectives, Indicators, Thresholds, and Surveillance Methods. The services required by the Contractor are summarized into performance objectives and indicators, along with the minimum standards that relate directly to mission essential items. The performance threshold briefly describes the minimum acceptable levels of quality or service required for each requirement. These thresholds are critical to mission success.

Performance Requirements Summary (PRS)

(Satisfactory Performance) Method of Surveillance Minimum Level of Performance Standard

PRS #1 (SOW 3.1-3.2) Accurate and Complete Program Reporting.

1) Project Kick Off Slides (CDRL A001) are delivered on time and meets all SOW content requirements.

2) Quarterly Status Reports (CDRL A002) is delivered on time and meets all PWS content requirements.

2) 100% on-time delivery of CDRLs

PRS #2 (SOW 4.1 thru 4.2) Consistent delivery of high quality reports and deliverables.

1) Deliverables and SCRM data are accurate, complete and incorporate all pertinent data with no (or minor) adjustments required by the Government.

2) Consistent quality reports and SCRM data delivered throughout period of performance.

1) Inspection of SCRM Data by COR (with TPOCs input).

2)Customer Feedback

1) No more than one (1) instance where major adjustments to deliverables is required by the Government.

2) All errors / omissions identified by the Government were corrected within five (5) business days.

2) Alerts/Notifications of changes in data are provided within 5 calendar days

1) Inspection of SCRM Data by COR (with TPOCs input).

2)Customer Feedback

1) No more than two (2) instances where Government identified data inconsistencies