17-R-0001_RFP_Att_1_QASP.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

SEAFAC OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SUPPORT SERVICES

29 DECEMBER 2016

1.0 BACKGROUND

The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) identifies procedures to help ensure that the contractor is performing in accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW). The QASP and associated performance standards are identified prior to contract award to ensure that the Government receives the quality of services required and pays only for services meeting an acceptable level. Authority for issuance of this QASP is identified in Section E – “Inspection and Acceptance” of the Contract, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts, to be executed by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

This QASP is incorporated into, and is a part of, the contract, and is therefore provided as an attachment to the solicitation.

2.0 PURPOSE

This QASP provides the performance standards for the SEAFAC Operations and Maintenance Support Services effort and identifies the procedures by which the Government might monitor contract performance. It is intended that the QASP be a tool to guide the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and Technical Advisors (TAs) in assessing contractor performance. To ensure contractor performance is appropriately monitored, the performance, timing, and frequency of inspections are determined at the discretion of the Government. As the performance period progresses, the levels of surveillance may be altered for service areas where performance is either consistently exceptional or consistently unsatisfactory. The Government retains the right to utilize a variety of surveillance methods and/or Quality Assurance (QA) procedures; or to increase/decrease the degree of surveillance efforts at any time to support Task Order compliance.

The contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the Task Order. The contractor shall measure quality through its own Quality Control Plan (QCP). The contractor’s responsibility for ensuring quality control applies to all work performed under this Task Order, regardless of whether the effort is performed by the contractor or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP shall set forth the procedures for how the contractor will self-inspect the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, problem resolution, communication, and other performance requirements of all work performed under this Task Order. The subject QASP is not intended to replace the contractor’s QCP.

3.0 PERFORMANCE OF QUALITY ASSURANCE

Contractor performance may be monitored by the Government through various surveillance methods including 100% inspection, periodic inspection, and/or customer feedback. When surveillance indicates that performance is not in compliance with the contract requirements, the COR/TA will determine whether the deficiency is a result of the actions of the contractor or the Government. If the cause of the defect is due to action/inaction by the contractor, the contractor is responsible for correction of the problem at no additional expense to the Government.

Adjectival ratings, the same or similar to those identified in the table below, will be utilized when evaluating contractor performance.

requirements to the Government’s benefit.

requirements to the Government’s benefit.

The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet implemented satisfactory corrective measures.

recovery is not likely in a timely manner. Contractor’s corrective actions to-date are non-existent or ineffective.

4.0 PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

Both semi-annual/informal and annual/formal performance evaluations will be completed by the COR for the subject contract. Informal evaluations are completed on a monthly basis, while formal evaluations will be completed via the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) at the end of each year of performance. The CPARS evaluations may also be a deciding factor in the Government’s determination as to whether or not it elects to exercise any of its options under the subject contract. For this contract, the Government will address the quality of product/service, schedule, cost control, management, and regulatory compliance areas in the formal CPARS report. While the Government may use QASP surveillance to assist in a CPARS evaluation, the QASP and associated findings shall not be assumed to be representative of the information to be identified or incorporated via formal contractor performance reports.

5.0 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES & STANDARDS

The performance objectives, performance standards, acceptable quality levels (AQLs), and potential monitoring methods utilized when evaluating contractor performance are identified in the following table. These measures are applicable to all functional areas of the SOW and also apply to any/all contract provisions to which the contractor must comply. Detailed metrics, standards, and surveillance methods may vary depending on the task or subtask being adjudicated.

LEVEL OF EFFORT

(LOE) TASK

PERFORMANCE

Performance of SOW tasks are commensurate with the specialized experience and labor categories set forth in the Task Order.

Organizational structure provides for qualified personnel assigned with duties, responsibilities, and authority necessary to achieve project goals.

Lines of communication facilitate timely exchange of information, both technical and contractual, in order to meet project goals.

Any Government Oversight Team (COR/TA) inspections support a rating of satisfactory or above with respect to performance standards, with major and minor issues/problems resolved as follows:

No major performance issues are identified, or, if major performance issues are identified, they are immediately addressed by the contractor and the contractor develops and communicates to the Government an adequate plan to resolve the issue(s) within two weeks.

Minor issues are easily correctable.

Repeated minor issue(s) identified over two (or more) consecutive months, that continue to recur will be raised to a major issue level.

Any CDRL deliverable requiring Government approval shall require no more than two review/comment/approval cycles to be determined as acceptable to the Government.

Badging requirements are submitted no later than 30 days prior to badge expiration.

DD 254 requirements are followed.

Navy provided, mandatory training (e.g. Information Assurance (IA), etc.) is completed by, or prior to, the specified due dates.

Direct observation of performance.

Periodic inspection of performance and/or draft deliverables.

100% inspection of invoices, final deliverables, and/or stringent requirements (tasks required by law, safety, or security).

Customer Feedback.

DELIVERABLE

CONTENT

Deliverable reports are technically accurate, grammatically correct, clear, and concise.

Deliverables follow Data Item Description (DID) format/content requirements and are delivered on time, per the Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs) under the contract.

Discrepancies are minor. Analyses, reports, and drawings include adequate depth and breadth to clearly identify and qualify issues.

PERSONNEL

REQUIREMENTS

All contractor/subcontractor personnel have proper security badges (e.g. site badge and Common Access Card (CAC)), announce themselves when entering Government offices, and identify themselves as contractors in e-mail and other communications.