Solicitation_N0017417R0009_ATT_D_QASP.doc

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 assistance with Demonstration and Assessment Team Support Services.

The resulting performance based contract will have cost plus fixed fee Labor CLINs, and cost only Other Direct Cost (ODC) CLINs. The period of performance for this contract will cover a base and four (4) options for a total of five (5) 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 in accordance with the Contractor Self-Assessment Milestone Chart, 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).

CONTRACTOR SELF-ASSESSMENT MILESTONE CHART

BASE

OPTION I

OPTION II

OPTION III

OPTION IV

CLOSE

Month 2

Month 2

Month 2

Month 2

Month 2

Month 2

Month 3

Month 3

Month 3

Month 3

Month 3

Month 4

Month 4

Month 4

Month 4

Month 4

Month 5

Month 5

Month 5

Month 5

Month 5

Month 6

Month 6

Month 6

Month 6

Month 6

Month 8

Month 8

Month 8

Month 8

Month 8

Month 9

Month 9

Month 9

Month 9

Month 9

Month 10

Month 10

Month 10

Month 10

Month 10

Month 11

Month 11

Month 11

Month 11

Month 11

Month 12

Month 12

Month 12

Month 12

Month 12

Contractor Self- Assessment Reporting Due Date

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 Administrator 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 Performance Work Statement (PWS) 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

(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

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

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

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

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

*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. 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

ODC funds are not properly tracked and/or are not within the scope of the contract.

Contractor routinely completes task within the originally agreed upon cost.

Funds and resources are generally used in a cost-effect manner. No major resource management problems are apparent

ODCs are reasonable, within scope, and clearly identified.

Reductions in direct and indirect costs to the Government below contract estimated costs are noteworthy.

Contractor provides detailed cost analysis and recommendations to government for resolution of problems identified.

Funds and resources are optimally used to provide the maximum benefit for the funds and resources available.

Documented savings are apparent.

Reports do not accurately track and clearly identify ODC items

Combating Trafficking in Persons IAW with FAR 52.222-50

Table 4: Performance Requirements Summary Table

PWS Task Area

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Typical Monitoring Methods

Data reported by the required date

Data shall be reported no later than October 31 of each calendar year

Government oversight of ECMRA

Documentation requires no more than two (2) review/comment/approval cycles, to meet acceptance. 90% include comprehensive recommendations proposed to allow for expeditious Government action. 95% completed by due date.

Government oversight of review/ comment/approval cycle.

Documentation requires no more than two (2) review/comment/approval cycles, to meet acceptance. 90% include comprehensive recommendations proposed to allow for expeditious Government action. 95% completed by due date.

Government oversight of review/ comment/approval cycle.

Event Specific Execution Plans. Implementation of the Planning Documents will be through a series of Event Specific Execution Documents. Depending on the event, these Execution documents may be titled differently; e.g. Demonstration Execution Document (DED), Assessment Execution Document (AED), Letter of Instruction (LOI), etc. Regardless of the title, each execution document will describe an executable plan for collecting, analyzing, and reporting the assessment objectives and the specific metrics that will be used for a specific event. Each execution document will describe what will happen, when it will happen, where it will happen, who is responsible for making it happen, and how it will happen. Event Specific Plans are required for each program field event will be submitted within 30 working days of the field event start date.

Table 5 entitled: “COST EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND STANDARDS”, shall be included when the contract will be cost-reimbursable.

TABLE 5: COST EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND STANDARDS

ODC funds are not properly tracked and/or are not within the scope of the contract.

Contractor routinely completes the effort within the originally agreed to estimated cost. Contractor provides measures for controlling all costs at estimated costs. Funds and resources are generally used in a cost-effective manner. No major resource management problems are apparent.

ODCs are reasonable, within scope, and clearly identified.

Reductions in direct costs to the Government below contract estimated costs are noteworthy. Contractor provides detailed cost analysis and recommendations to Government for resolution of problems identified. Funds and resources are optimally used to provide the maximum benefit for the funds and resources available. Documented savings are apparent.

Reports do not accurately track and clearly identify ODC items.