Attachment 5 - QASP CEnIIC.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

for

Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) Engineering, Integration, and Installation Contract (CEnIIC)

Prepared By Program Executive Office C4I

Program Manager Warfare (PMW) 760 Ship Integration Program Office

14 July 2016 ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE

2. AUTHORITY

3. SCOPE

4. GOVERNMENT RESOURCES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

A) PROCURING CONTRACTING OFFICER (PCO)

B) CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE (COR)/ALTERNATE CONTRACTING OFFICER’S

REPRESENTATIVE (ACOR)

C) PRINCIPAL INTEGRATION PLATFORM MANAGER (PIPM)

D) INTEGRATION PLATFORM MANAGER (IPM)

E) PLATFORM LEAD (PL)

5. METHODS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE

A) CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT SYSTEM (CPARS)

B) QASP

1) Customer Feedback

2) Periodic Inspection

3) One Hundred Percent Inspection

4) Random Monitoring

6. OBSERVING CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

7. DOCUMENTATION

A) CPARS

B) QASP

8. SURVEILLANCE EVALUATION AREAS

A) QUALITY OF SERVICE

B) SCHEDULE

C) COST CONTROL

D) BUSINESS RELATIONS

E) MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL

9. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

10. PERFORMANCE RATINGS AND CRITERIA

For Official Use Only (FOUO) Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP), provided as an Attachment to the contract, is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the surveillance of Contractor performance. The intent of the QASP is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the contract, the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract, and that the Government pays only for the acceptable level of services received. The QASP requires Government surveillance and oversight of the Contractor’s quality control efforts to ensure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering the results specified in the contract and/or Task Orders (TOs). A copy of this plan will be furnished to the Contractor so that the Contractor will be aware of the methods that the Government will employ in evaluating performance on this contract and address any concerns that the Contractor may have prior to initiating work. The findings from the QASP will be used to equip the Government with timely, documented reports to be used in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation.

2. AUTHORITY

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided by contract Section E: Inspection and Acceptance, included in TOs that are executed by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

3. SCOPE

To fully understand the roles and the responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction between the Contractor’s Quality Control Plan and the Government’s Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.

The Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract. The Contractor develops their Quality Control Plan (QCP) for Government review and uses it to guide and document the implementation of the required management and quality control actions.

The Government is responsible for providing surveillance and oversight of the quality of the Contractor’s work during this contract. The QASP established for this contract was developed using five of the seven evaluation areas of the CPARS: (1) Quality of Product or Service; (2) Schedule; (3) Cost Control; (4) Business Relations; and (5) Management of Key Personnel. The Government reserves the right to make changes to this QASP during the contract performance period.

4. GOVERNMENT RESOURCES and RESPONSIBILITIES The PCO and Program Manager Warfare (PMW) 760 Government personnel are responsible for conducting surveillance activities with regard to the Contractor after contract award and throughout contract performance. The PCO and Program Office will utilize the QASP as a tool to evaluate whether the Contractor meets the performance standards in the contract.

The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

a) Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) – The only person duly appointed with the authority to enter into, administer, or terminate contracts and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government.

The PCO ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the PCO who ensures the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract.

b) Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)/Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representative (ACOR) - An individual designated in writing by the PCO to act as an authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. The ACOR functions as the COR when the COR is unavailable to perform his/her duties. The source and authority for a COR/ACOR is the PCO. Responsibility for surveillance activities remains with the COR/ACOR.

The COR/ACOR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the Contractor proposes that may affect contract price, schedule, scope or terms and conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action.

c) Principal Integration Platform Manager (PIPM) – The PIPM provides acquisition support to the Program Manager (PM) and Deputy Program Manager (DPM) by ensuring execution of assigned programs and that objectives are consistent with statute and regulatory requirements defined in Department of Defense (DoD) directives. The PIPM interacts with and communicates all relevant information to the COR/ACOR and when necessary, the PCO. The PIPM supervises the Integration Platform Managers (IPMs). The PIPM is also responsible, with the IPMs, for developing the acquisition strategy, contracting approach, test strategy, program plan/schedule, the requirements of integration, installation, and life-cycle support, and acquisition documentation required by the program/project. The PIPM also works with product PMWs and other Government stakeholders to ensure compliance with all DoD and Department of Navy (DoN) acquisition program guidance and the close coordination with related programs as they develop Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) capabilities and support C4I baselines.

The PIPM is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the Contractor proposes that may affect contract price, schedule, scope or terms and conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action.

d) Integration Platform Manager (IPM) – The IPM is responsible for managing the procurement, integration, and installation of new or existing C4I ship systems. The IPM is responsible for technical management of the project and ensures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance, as well as provides oversight of the work accomplished by the Platform Leads (PLs). The IPM interacts with and communicates all relevant information to the COR/ACOR and when necessary, the PCO.

The IPM is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any contractual changes that the Contractor proposes that may affect contract price, schedule, scope or terms and conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action.

e) Platform Lead (PL) – The PL provides detailed technical oversight and ensures government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance and reports his/her findings to the IPM in a timely, complete, and impartial fashion. The PL interacts with and communicates all relevant information to the IPM, COR/ACOR, and when necessary, the PCO.

While the PL may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, he/she is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the Contractor proposes that may affect contract price, schedule, scope, or terms and conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action as applicable.

5. METHODS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE

a) Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – Per FAR Part 42.15 the Government must collect Contractor past performance information. CPARS was created in 1998 to satisfy this need, designated as the Navy’s official Contractor report card collection system, and must be used when preparing performance evaluations per Navy Marine Corps Acquisition Regulation Supplement (NMCARS) Subpart 5242.15. Any service contract with a value greater than $1M shall be entered into CPARS. The Contractor has a vested interest in the Government-generated CPARS rating under this contract since Government agencies are required to review a contractor’s CPARS file before awarding a new contract.

An evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed annually at the contract level. The Government will address: (1) Quality of Product or Service; (2) Schedule; (3) Cost Control; (4) Business Relations; (5) Management of Key Personnel; and (6) Utilization of Small Business* of the services set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), and will include performance objectives, performance thresholds, minimum acceptance levels, and surveillance methods. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD and the continuation of the contract, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately and in conjunction with the QASP.

*Although area (6) Utilization of Small Business is evaluated on an annual basis at the contract level for CPARS, it is not a QASP evaluation area provided in Section 8.

b) QASP - The Surveillance Evaluation Areas (Section 8), the Performance Standards (Section 9), and the Performance Ratings and Criteria (Section 10) shall be used by the COR in the administration of this QASP.

The list below provides the surveillance options available in the administration of this QASP.

1) Customer Feedback – Customer feedback may be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer communications. Valid customer feedback must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the feedback, including how schedule, price, etc. were impacted. The COR/ACOR shall maintain a summary log of all formally received customer feedback as well as a copy of all other feedback, including the results of any customer satisfaction surveys, in a documentation file.

2) Periodic Inspection - Periodic inspections may be conducted if the Government determines it is necessary.

3) One Hundred Percent Inspection – This surveillance type is reserved for those tasks that occur infrequently or for those tasks having very stringent performance requirements, and will be conducted if the Government determines it is necessary.

4) Random Monitoring - Random monitoring or sampling is any inspection that is less than 100% and not periodic. Monitoring performance randomly shall be conducted if the Government determines it is necessary.

6. OBSERVING CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

The COR/ACOR, PIPM, IPM, and/or PL will inspect task performance by either watching actual task performance, physically checking an attribute of the completed task, checking a management report, test witnessing, or otherwise inspecting the task or its results to determine whether or not the performance meets the standards contained in each TO. The PIPM, IPM, and/or PL will be familiar with the standards and requirements set forth in each TO and will document in writing and notify the COR/ACOR and PCO when the standards and requirements are not met.

Semi-annual Program Reviews shall be scheduled at the Government’s request to review Contractor performance. The Program Reviews will also provide an open forum for discussion where all invested parties, both Government and Contractor, are present to address issues or review processes. All active TOs will be reviewed in relation to cost, schedule, risks, personnel and material management, and contract deliverables.

7. DOCUMENTATION

a) CPARS – The COR/ACOR will perform an annual assessment of overall contract performance, utilizing the CPARS performance ratings listed in Section 10. This annual assessment will be entered into CPARS in accordance with established procedures and processes. The CPARS evaluation is submitted by the COR through the CPARS website.

b) QASP – The Surveillance Evaluation Areas provided in Section 8 specify the evaluation areas under surveillance, present the performance standards, and provide guidance to the Government for determining a performance rating for each of the five QASP evaluation areas.

The COR/ACOR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s quality assurance surveillance function, including metrics collected from the TO(s). All such records will be retained for the life of this contract. The COR/ACOR shall forward the Quality Assurance file to the PCO at termination or completion of the contract.

8. SURVEILLANCE EVALUATION AREAS

The contract will be assessed on the following:

a) Quality of Service – Assess whether the Contractor’s performance is complete, accurate, and meets the contract requirements, specifications, and standards. Assess whether the Contractor’s methodologies and technical performance/products are in accordance with commonly accepted technical or professional standards, and reflect complete understanding of the PWS and program objectives. Assess how successfully the Contractor meets expected quality.

b) Schedule – Assess the Contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule in relation to meeting scheduled milestone events during the relevant assessment period that contribute to or affect the program’s schedule. Assess all schedule delays, causes for the delays, and the Contractor’s corrective action plan. Determine whether schedule impact is due to Government-or Contractor-caused delay.

c) Cost Control – Assess whether the Contractor’s incurred cost and hours are consistent with the value of services and products received by the Government. For TOs where the level of effort and cost were based on a Contractor’s proposal, the relationship of these estimates to actual cost will be assessed for accuracy in cost estimating. Assess the invoices/vouchers to verify that they are accurate, complete, and submitted in accordance with contract requirements. Assess any Contractor-innovative cost saving solutions. Assess the Contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. If the Contractor is experiencing cost growths, assess the causes and Contractor-proposed solutions for the cost overruns.

d) Business Relations - Assess the Contractor’s reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction. Assess the Contractor’s effectiveness and efficiency of managing personnel in response to changing priorities, as well as matching personnel qualifications to requirement tasking. Assess the timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification, resolution, and corrective actions plans.

e) Management of Key Personnel – Assess the Contractor’s management of key personnel on the contract in response to changing priorities, as well as matching key personnel skill levels to requirement tasking. Assess whether resumes are submitted to and approved by the Government before key personnel begin work.

9. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The following Performance Standards apply to the five evaluation areas in Section 3 (Scope).

Evaluation Area

Performance Standard and Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Remedy/Incentive

Quality of Service

The Contractor provides quality services and related Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) deliverables that are accurate, complete, and meet TO requirements, specifications and standards. The Contractor follows their Quality Assurance Plan documents.

The Contractor’s methodologies and technical performance/products are in accordance with commonly accepted technical or professional standards, and reflect complete understanding of the PWS and program objectives.

Remedy: Failure to provide services within the Performance Standard and AQL may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with the TO requirements for no additional fee, as required in accordance with FAR Clause 52.246-5. Multiple failures may provide a basis for termination and/or a negative CPARS report. If a second rework is required, it is at no cost to the Government. If replacement of personnel due to failures is required, relocation/replacement costs shall be borne by the Contractor.

Continued failure may result in default.

Incentive: Performance that exceeds the standard and AQL will be reflected in CPARS as Very Good or Exceptional.

Schedule

The Contractor conducts PWS tasking in alignment with TO schedules and milestone events. Appropriate PWS tasking is performed without causing programmatic delays. All services and products are submitted on time. If there is a delay or the schedule has shifted, it is documented and communicated to the Government.

The Contractor is proactive in forecasting and notifying the Government of any schedule delays regardless of cause or source.

Remedy: The Contractor shall provide an explanation for schedule slips or other delays, to include a complete explanation for the schedule slips or delay. The Contractor shall prepare, submit for review by the Government, and implement approved corrective action plans if necessary. Other remedies may include those stated in the contract’s Clause 52.246-5.

Incentive: Performance that exceeds the

Cost Control

Contractor-incurred cost and hours are consistent with the value of the services and products received by the Government. The value received is commensurate with the cost and hours expended.

Remedy: The Contractor shall accurately explain the causes of cost growths, cost increases, and cost and/or funding discrepancies, and propose and implement corrective solutions that are satisfactory to the Government. Remedies may also

All funding and cost status reports are accurate and complete and submitted in accordance with contract requirements and contract clauses.

The Contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility. The Contractor effectively forecasts, manages, and controls cost, through cost and program management, and effective and efficient use of staffing resources.

include those stated in the contract’s Clause 52.246-5.

Incentive: Cost savings realized through innovative processes and/or the use of staffing resources will be reflected in CPARS as Very Good or Exceptional.

Business Relations

The Contractor manages to a successful completion of each overall TO, and contract requirements.

The Contractor’s management results in reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction.

The Contractor takes a proactive role in identifying, responding to, and resolving all issues in a timely fashion.

Remedy: The Contractor shall prepare, submit for review by the Government, and implement approved corrective action plans as determined by the PCO.

Incentive: Management oversight and processes that exceed the performance standard and AQL will be reflected in CPARS as Very Good or Exceptional.

Management of Key

Personnel

The Contractor effectively and efficiently manages key personnel in response to changing priorities, as well as matching key personnel skill levels to requirement tasking. Resumes are submitted to and approved by the Government before key personnel begin work.

Remedy: The Contractor shall prepare, submit for review by the Government, and implement approved corrective action as determined by the PCO.

Incentive: Management oversight and processes that exceed the performance

10. PERFORMANCE RATINGS AND CRITERIA

Performance

Rating Criteria

Exceptional

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