Attachment 10 - QASP.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Propulsor Demonstration Hardware

11/25/2019

1.0 BACKGROUND

The QASP identifies procedures to help ensure that the contractor is performing in accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS). The QASP and associated performance standards are established 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).

2.0 PURPOSE

This QASP provides the performance standards for the Pre-Prototype Propulsors effort and identifies the procedures by which the Government plans to 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 contract/Task Order (TO) compliance.

The contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract/TO. The contractor shall measure quality through its own procedures and/or Quality Control Plan (QCP). The contractor’s responsibility for ensuring quality control applies to all work performed under this contract/TO, regardless of whether the effort is performed by the contractor or by subcontractors. The subject QASP is not intended to replace the contractor’s internal quality control procedures or

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/TO requirements, the COR/TA will determine if the deficiency is a result of the actions of the contractor. 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.

RATING PERFORMANCE STANDARD/CRITERIA

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements.

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements.

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

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. Contractor’s corrective actions to-date are non-existent or ineffective.

4.0 PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

Annual performance evaluations will be completed by the COR for the subject contract/TO unless extraordinary circumstances warrant an interim evaluation.

Informal performance reviews will be completed on a monthly basis and submitted as part of the COR Monthly Status Report to the PCO for review via the Contracting Officer’s Representative Tool(CORT). 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 options under the subject contract/TO. 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. The Government may use QASP surveillance to assist in a CPARS evaluation.

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. Performance encompasses product/service, schedule, cost control, management, and regulatory compliance areas in the formal CPARS report. These measures are applicable to all functional areas of the SOW/PWS and also apply to any/all contract/TO provisions to which the contractor must comply. Detailed metrics, standards, and surveillance methods may vary depending on the task or subtask being adjudicated.

OBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE STANDARD ACCEPTABLE QUALITY

LEVEL

MONITORING METHODS

LEVEL OF

EFFORT

(LOE) TASK

PERFORMANCE

Performance of SOW/PWS tasks are commensurate with the specialized experience and labor categories set forth in the contract/TO and Key personnel meet the qualifications/certification s/experience levels specified in the contract/TO (whether specifically stated in the contract/TO or incorporated by reference)

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:

Evidence of qualifications, certifications, experience provided for Key personnel meets minimum requirements and performance is commensurate with the same.

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

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/TO.

Discrepancies are minor.

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

PERSONNEL

REQUIREMENTS

All personnel meet the education and qualifications specified in the contract/TO (whether specifically stated or incorporated by reference via the contractor’s proposal). 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.

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.

COST / COST

CONTROL

The level of effort is performed within the total estimated cost and limitation of funds on contract/TO.

Costs are commensurate with the cost of the work actually performed under the contract/TO.

Cost Vouchers/Invoices are prepared and submitted in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the contract/TO (e.g. WAWF

Clause, Pricing Structure in Section B of the Contract/TO).

Invoicing is submitted timely (prior to the expiration of funds).

Invoices contain enough detail so as to allow the Government to monitor cost related to performance.

Performance and reported or billed costs NEVER exceed the amount of funds on contract/TO.

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.

Government approval shall require no more than two review/comment/approval cycles to be determined as acceptable to the

Government.