Attachment_2_-_Quality_Assurance_Plan_Task_2.pdf

Solicitation Number: N00174-16-R-0004 Task 2

Attachment 2

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure systematic quality assurance methods are used in this performance based service contract. The Contractor shall perform in accordance with the QASP performance metrics, and the Government shall receive the quality of services identified in the contract. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this acquisition.

This contract provides Tri-Service Aircrew Escape Systems Total Life Cycle Management Support, Task 2:

Quality Evaluation/Surveillance Program Support. The resulting performance based contract will have firm fixed price Labor and Other Direct Cost (ODC) CLINs. The period of performance for this contract will cover a base period and three (3) option periods for a total of four (4) years. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the overall objectives of this procurement.

2. AUTHORITY

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3. SCOPE

The QASP is put in place to provide Government surveillance and oversight of the Contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract.

The Contractor’s performance on this contract will be evaluated by the Government as described below and summarized in the Contractor Self-Assessment Milestone Chart. The first evaluation will cover the period ending six months after date of contract award, with successive evaluations being performed for each twelve month period thereafter, until the Contractor completes performance under this contract. The evaluation will encompass all work performed by the Contractor during the assessment period, but will not include cumulative information from prior assessments. The Contractor will complete a self-assessment of the work performed, to be delivered to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the Contract Administrator, as identified in the contract, No Later Than (NLT) 60 days after the end of the assessment period. The self-assessment shall cover all areas of the Government QASP. Based on the evaluation results, provided by the COR and the Contract Administrator, the Contracting Officer will assign an overall performance rating. If the Contracting Officer assigns an “Unsatisfactory” performance rating for the period evaluated, the next option period will not be exercised. A final assessment shall be completed by the Government within four months of the completion date of the contract (inclusive of all exercised options).

Attachment 2

CONTRACTOR SELF-ASSESSMENT MILESTONE CHART

BASE OPTION I OPTION II OPTION

III CLOSE

Month 1 *PD

Month 1 PD 2 Month 1 PD 3 Month 1 PD 4 Month 1

Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 3 Month 3 Month 3 Month 3 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 5 Month 5 Month 5 Month 5 Month 6 Month 6 Month 6 Month 6 Month 7 PD 2 Month 7 PD 3 Month 7 PD 4 Month 7 PD 5 Month 8 Month 8 Month 8 Month 8 Month 9 Month 9 Month 9 Month 9 Month 10 Month 10 Month 10 Month 10 Month 11 Month 11 Month 11 Month 11 Month 12 Month 12 Month 12 Month 12

Contractor Self Assessment Reporting Due Date

*PD = Period

4. GOVERNMENT RESOURCES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following Government resources shall have responsibility for the implementation of this QASP:

Procurement Contracting Officer – The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interest of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the PCO that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance. The PCO for this contract is identified in Section G.

Contract Administrator – An individual assigned by the PCO to assist in the daily administration of the contract. The Contract Administrator also provides input to the PCO and the COR as to the quality of performance for areas addressed in this QASP. The Contract Administrator for this contract is identified in Section G.

Contracting Officer’s Representative – The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. 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.

Government Technical Point of Contact – The COR designates an individual Government Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to assist in administering specific projects under the contract. The Government TPOC is responsible for assisting in administering a specific project under the contract. A Government TPOC cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the contract, make commitments or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf.

5. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

a. QASP – The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used by the COR in the technical administration and the PCO/Contract Specialist in non-technical administration of this QASP. The QASP will be the prime determinant in exercising the option.

b. Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – The market place for information technology, engineering, and management support services is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this contract. Additionally, an evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed at the end of each year of performance. This evaluation will be one determinant in exercising an option. For this procurement, the Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, and other important areas. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and the continuation of the contract, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool with the QASP.

6. DOCUMENTATION

In addition to providing annual reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR 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 performance of the quality assurance function. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the contract.

7. SURVEILLANCE

The tables below set forth the performance ratings, standards, outcome and surveillance methods to document the results of the surveillance on an annual basis, as well as interim and informal reviews (i.e., In-Process Reviews (IPRs)) on a more frequent basis.

(a) Performance Ratings: The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s performance of the Statement of Work (SOW) and the Contracting Officer will assign one of the following ratings:

(1) Excellent

(2) Satisfactory

(3) Unsatisfactory

The standards associated with these ratings are given in the following Table 1:

Table 1: Overall Performance Ratings

Overall Performance Rating Standard Excellent “Excellent” ratings for all performance evaluation criteria.

Satisfactory A minimum of “Satisfactory” ratings for all performance evaluation criteria.

Unsatisfactory A rating of “Unsatisfactory” for one or more performance evaluation criteria.

(b) Objectives/Determination

1. Interim/Informal

Interim/Informal performance evaluations will be provided to assess performance at each IPR.

2. Annual

The PCO will make a performance determination at the end of each evaluation period. The determination will be based upon the COR’s recommendations, the Contractor’s comments, including any Self-Evaluation Report, and any other information deemed relevant by the PCO.

The PCO shall resolve disagreements between the COR’s recommendations and the Contractor’s comments/report regarding the evaluation. The PCO’s performance determination is unilateral and final. The PCO will document the determination and provide a copy to the Contractor within 30 days of receipt of the Contractor’s self-assessment.

Table 2: Objectives

Assessment Period Acceptable Performance Definition

Assessment Method Outcome

First 6 Months of the Base Period of the contract (Period 1)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the contract.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option 1.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option I.*

Last 6 months of Base Period and the first 6 months of Option I (Period 2)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the contract.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option 2.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option II.*

Last 6 months of Option I and the first 6 months of Option II (Period 3)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the contract.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option 3.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option III.*

Last 6 months of Option II and the first 6 months of Option III (Period 4)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the contract.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for the reporting period.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for the reporting period.

Last 6 months of Option III (Period 5)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the contract.

Final QASP Rating

*The Government will not exercise the next option year term unless the Contractor meets the acceptable performance definition.

(c) Performance Evaluation Criteria. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the criteria and standards provided for each objective and identified in Tables 3 through 5 of this contract QASP.

(d) Organization. The performance evaluation organization consists of the PCO, who will serve as the Determining Official, and the COR. In some instances, a TPOC will be assigned to the contract in addition to the COR.

(e) This performance evaluation does not replace any other requirement for evaluating Contractor performance that may be required by this contract such as a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report or other required reports.

Table 3: Task Performance Evaluation Criteria and Standards

Criterion Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent Task Performance Work product fails to meet

Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in Performance Requirements Summary Table (4).

Work product routinely meets Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in Performance Requirements Summary Table 4.

Work product frequently exceeds Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in Performance Requirements Summary Table 4.

Staffing Contractor provides marginally qualified or unqualified personnel. Lapses in coverage occur regularly.

Contractor provides qualified personnel. Lapses in coverage may occasionally occur and are managed per individual contract policy.

Contractor provides highly qualified personnel. Contractor reassigns personnel to ensure proper coverage.

Actual lapses in coverage occur very rarely, if ever, and are managed per contract policy.

Contractor ensures staff training remains current.

Timeliness Contractor frequently misses deadlines, schedules, or is slow to respond to government requests or is non-responsive to government requests.

Contractor routinely meets deadlines, schedules, and responds quickly to government requests.

Contractor always meets deadlines, schedules, and responds immediately to government requests.

Customer Satisfaction Fails to meet customer expectations.

Meets customer expectations. Exceeds customer expectations to the benefit of the overall tasking.

Table 4: Performance Requirements Summary Table

SOW

Task Area

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan Typical

Monitoring Methods

2.2.1

Quality evaluation (QE) testing on cartridges, CADs, PADs, and related energetic and ballistic systems.

Fabrication of test fixtures and related hardware.

Analyses, investigations and delivered products include adequate depth and breadth to clearly and effectively meet the Government’s quality standards and functional requirements with exceptions noted.

Current DoD policy and/or industry standards are followed. Results delivered IAW agreed upon schedules and level of effort. Test fixtures and related hardware are fabricated to the required drawing package per the applicable SOW.

Test fixtures and hardware undergo receipt inspection for conformance to the applicable drawing.

Deliverables require no more than two (2) review/comment/ approval cycles to meet acceptance. 90% completed by due date.

Deliverables are accurate, complete, meet requirements of the applicable specification and are effective in meeting the Government’s stated objectives. Test fixtures and related hardware meet the drawing requirements which include, but not limited to, the dimensional and material criteria.

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, and review of methods and procedures, timeliness and effectiveness of solutions.

Government option to witness testing with advanced notice.

Government performance of, or review of, receipt inspection of test fixtures and hardware.

Inspection can be performed by the contractor with data supplied to the government.

2.2.2

Prepare presentation materials, present briefings and facilitate meetings in support of engineering efforts and JPO mission, tasking and goals.

Documents are technically accurate and grammatically correct. Documents and revisions are delivered IAW agreed upon schedules and level of effort. Current DoD policy and/or industry standards are followed. Schedules and milestones are

Deliverables require no more than two (2) review/comment/approv al cycles to meet acceptance. 90% include comprehensive recommendations proposed to allow for expeditious Government action. 95% completed by due date.

Documentation delivered prior to meeting for

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, and review of methods and procedures, timeliness and effectiveness of solutions.

Attachment 2 updated at meetings. Government review/comment.

2.2.3

Dispose of energetic/explosive items and associated hardware upon completion of task requirements. Hold any test units determined to be failures, deemed a test anomaly or otherwise required for further investigation.

Adherence to applicable policies and regulations for energetic/explosive disposal. Current DoD policy and/or industry standards are followed. Results delivered IAW agreed upon schedules and level of effort. Hold items designated by the Government for investigation until the Government releases them for disposal.

Deliverables require no more than two (2) review/comment/ approval cycles to meet acceptance. 90% completed by due date.

Test items are disposed of per applicable regulations if not required for further investigation. Items required for investigation are adequately stored until the Government provides release.

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, and review of methods and procedures, timeliness and effectiveness of solutions.

Government may witness disposal of items.

2.2.4

Provide facilities, equipment and personnel adequate to fulfill the requirements of Task 2.

Facilities, equipment and personnel provide sufficient support to enable complete and acceptable execution of all the requirements of Task 2 in the applicable

SOW.

Deliverables require no more than three review/comment/ approval cycles to meet acceptance. 90% completed by due date.

Equipment used is of industry standards and possesses the capability of producing the required hardware and data.

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, and review of methods and procedures, timeliness and effectiveness of solutions.

Government oversight of installation, certification, and equipment calibration for operational use.

2.2.5

Conduct testing to include, but not be limited to, destructive, non-destructive (including x-ray), environmental and ballistic testing IAW appropriate military and commercial specifications/ standards. Provide all relevant test data IAW the SOW.

Testing, analyses and investigations include adequate depth and breadth to clearly and effectively meet the Government’s quality standards and functional requirements with exceptions noted.

Current DoD policy and/or industry standards are followed. Results delivered IAW agreed upon schedules and level of effort. Testing carried out IAW applicable specifications and the SOW. Maintain the ability and possess the necessary

Deliverables require no more than two (2) review/comment/ approval cycles to meet acceptance. 90% completed by due date.

Meets or exceeds the standards used during Lot Acceptance Testing (LAT) and any other applicable specification.

Full release of test data generated with ample time for the Government to review for accuracy IAW the SOW.

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, and review of methods and procedures, timeliness and effectiveness of solutions.

Government oversight of installation, testing and certification for operational use.

Government review of data and test results.

Government option to witness testing with advanced notice.

Attachment 2 equipment to replicate tests as performed during Lot Acceptance Testing (LAT). All data generated during the QE test program is supplied to the Government and considered Government property.

2.2.6 Capability to perform

statistical analysis for each parameter and test condition.

Analyses include adequate depth and breadth to clearly and effectively meet the Government’s quality standards and functional requirements with exceptions noted.

Current DoD policy and/or industry standards are followed. Results delivered IAW agreed upon schedules and level of effort.

Deliverables require no more than two (2) review/comment/ approval cycles to meet acceptance. 90% completed by due date.

Deliverables are accurate, complete, meet requirements of the applicable specification and are effective in meeting the Government’s stated objectives.

Government oversight of review/comment/ approval process, and review of methods and procedures, timeliness and effectiveness of solutions.