Attachment J.2-QASP.pdf

Attachment J.1

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government-developed and applied document used to make sure the systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of this contract. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance objectives and the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract.

The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the Contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the SOW and the Contractor’s quality control plan (QCP).

This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of Government personnel involved in the evaluation of the quality of Contractor performance, identifies the performance objectives, and defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the Contractor’s performance. The QASP also describes quality assurance documentation requirements and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

2. AUTHORITY

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses and Section E – Inspection and Acceptance which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and deliverables called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) or a duly authorized representative.

3. SCOPE

The SOW structures the acquisition around "what" services or quality level is required, as opposed to "how" the Contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, non compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken to monitor and manage the Contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the SOW are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management, this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the Contractor.

4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) – An individual duly appointed with the authority to enter into contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. PCOs are designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of their respective authority. The PCO ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contract administration ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the PCO that ensures the Contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the acceptability of the Contractor’s performance. The PCO for this contract is identified in Section G.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as their authorized representative to assist in technical administration. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment which is a formal attachment to the contract. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s technical 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.

Contract Specialist – An individual assigned by the PCO to provide daily administration of the contract. The Contract Specialist provides input to the PCO and the COR as to the quality of performance for areas addressed in this QASP.

Subject Matter Expert (SME) – Individuals who may be assigned by the COR to perform limited technical oversight. A SME provides input to the COR as to the quality of technical performance for their respective area(s) of expertise. A SME cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the contract, make commitments or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf.

5. SCHEDULE

The QASP shall be utilized throughout performance to monitor the quality of work performed. Acceptance of the final analysis report and payment of the contract shall be made only after review of all products per the methodologies outlined in this QASP.

6. IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The overall performance ratings and standards are included in Table 1, “Task Performance Evaluation Criteria and Standards”.

7. METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

Surveillance Techniques - In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the Government to evaluate Contractor performance when appropriate. The COR will use the following methods of surveillance:

• 100% Inspection: When used, each item of interest shall be reviewed.

• Customer Feedback: Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

The Contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints, investigate and work with the PCO and Contractor to resolve the issue.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in Table 1. This matrix details the standards the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

9. MONITORING SYSTEM

The Government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, in conjunction with the PCO, will be reported using the methodology described herein.

Table 1 – Task Performance Evaluation Criteria and Standards

Element 1 – Quality of Product or Service Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

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 for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Deliverables are typically not well researched and contain many technical inaccuracies.

Rework is frequently required.

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.

Deliverables are occasionally not well researched and contain some technical inaccuracies.

Rework is occasionally required.

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.

Deliverables received are well researched, complete and technically accurate. No more than one revision is typically needed to accept the item.

Other deliverables meet all Contract requirements.

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.

Deliverables received are well researched, complete and technically accurate.

Other deliverables meet all Contract requirements.

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.

Deliverables received are always well researched, complete and technically accurate. They frequently exceed technical expectations.

Rework is not required. Other deliverables typically exceed all Contract requirements.

Element 3 – Schedule & Timeliness Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

Frequently misses deadlines, or is slow or non-responsive to respond to Government requests.

Occasionally misses deadlines, schedules or is slow or occasionally non-responsive to respond to Government requests.

Routinely meets deadlines and schedules, quickly responds to Government requests.

Routinely meets deadlines and schedules and occasionally delivers early and responds immediately to Government requests.

Routinely delivers ahead of deadlines, schedules, and responds immediately to Government requests

Element 4a – Management/Business Relations: Problem Resolution Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional Problems are unresolved, repetitive, or take excessive

Government effort to resolve.

Problems are generally resolved but take unusual Government effort to resolve or take an excessive amount of time to resolve.

Problems are resolved quickly with minimal Government involvement.

Problems occur infrequently and are generally resolved quickly with minimal Government involvement.

Problems are non-existent or the Contractor takes corrective action without Government involvement.

Element 4b – Management/Business Relations: Responsiveness Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

Unresponsive to Government requests and concerns.

Management is occasionally unresponsive to Government requests and concerns.

Management is responsive to Government requests and concerns.

Management is responsive to requests and concerns and occasionally proactive in anticipating concerns.

Management takes proactive approach in dealing with Government representatives and anticipates concerns.

Element 4c – Management/Business Relations: Communication Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

Fails to communicate with Government in an effective and timely manner.

Occasionally fails to communicate with Government in an effective and timely manner.

Routinely communicates with Government in an effective and timely manner.

Routinely communicates with Government in an effective and timely manner and is frequently proactive in managing communications.

Takes proactive approach such that communications are almost always clear, effective and timely.

Element 5a – Regulatory Compliance Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

Does not meet most contractual

Does not meet some contractual

Meets contractual requirements. The

Meets contractual

Meets contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

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.

contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear, or were, satisfactory.

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.

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.

Element 5b – Combatting Trafficking in Persons (Ref. FAR 52.222-50) Unsatisfactory N/A Satisfactory N/A N/A

The Contractor has not informed the Contracting Officer and the agency Inspector General of any credible information it has received that alleges a Contractor employee, Sub- Contractor, Sub- Contractor employee, or their agent has engaged in conduct that violates the policy.

The Contractor has informed the Contracting Officer and the agency Inspector General 100% of the time of any credible information it has received that alleges a Contractor employee, Sub- Contractor, Sub- Contractor employee, or their agent has engaged in conduct that violates the policy.

100% compliance of maintaining a compliance plan (including annual certification) as required by paragraph (h) of the clause.