Attachment_P5_-_QASP.doc

QUALIITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

COMMERCIAL AIR SERVICES (CAS)

AIRBORNE MARITIME SURVEILLANCE (AMS)

FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RANGES

1.

Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure the systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the performance based service tasks under the planned basic contract and task orders. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics and the Government receives the quality of services called for the individual orders.

This contract requirement is to procure Airborne Maritime Surveillance (AMS) for Department of Defense (DoD) Ranges. The Commercial Air Services (CAS) program provides Contractor range clearing services to United States Navy (USN) customers and other DoD agencies ensuring Ranges are clear to support missile testing and fleet training exercises. The contractor shall provide range clearing services to support a wide variety of testing. This testing consists of sub-surface, surface, and air testing with a number of multi-service projects for the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) community at Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF), Hawaii as well as other DOD ranges. Additionally, this contract will provide range clearing support for the testing of Theatre Missile Defense Systems and Telemetry requirements for supporting DoD tasks.

The performance based contract will be a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity (ID/IQ) contract with a continuous five year period of performance. Task orders will be issued to support individual range clearing requirements as the requirements become known. A properly executed and administered QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

2.

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

3.

Scope To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between Quality Control Plan and the QASP. The Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract (and task orders).

The QASP on the other hand, 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 order.

4.

Government Resources The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

Contracting Officer - A person duly appointed with the authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)) or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)) contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract is AIR-2.5.1.12. The ACO will be designated in the resulting contract. Contracting Officers are designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority.

Contracting Officer Representative (COR) - An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as their authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. The COR will be will appointed in the resulting contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

5.

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

Contracting Officer - The Contracting Officer ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the U.S in the contractual relationship. It is the Contracting Officer that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance.

Contracting Officer Representative - The 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 Contracting Officer for action.

6.

Methods of Quality Assurance (QA) Surveillance a.

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) - This is a competitive requirement. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS rating under this contract. Additionally, an evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed at the midpoint of each period of performance. This evaluation will be one determinant in awarding subsequent orders. The Government will address the quality of the product or service, schedule, cost control, management responsiveness, utilization of small business concerns, and other important areas of this procurement. 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.

b.

QASP - The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used by the COR in the technical administration of this QASP. In addition to the below instructions, the form to be used for documentation of quality assurance (QA) surveillance is the Surveillance Activity Checklist provided as Enclosure (4) herein.

7. Surveillance Enclosures (1), (2), and (3) set forth the performance standards, data standards, and incentives for the evaluation area and ratings for the Contractor and COR. Enclosure (4) provides the checklist and means for the COR to document on a monthly basis the results of the surveillance and shall be provided to the Contracting Officer on a quarterly basis.

8. Documentation In addition to providing quarterly reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR will maintain a complete QA file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the QA function, including the originals of the Quality Assurance Checklists. All such records will be maintained for the life of the contract. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the order.

9. Revisions to the QASP Revisions are the joint responsibility of the COR and PCO. The COR and PCO will review the QASP annually and will provide proposed changes. This document may be changed at any time upon review and approval by the COR and PCO and supported by the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

10. Enclosures Enclosure (1) - Airborne Maritime surveillance Services Performance Standards

Enclosure (2) - Data Performance Standards

Enclosure (3) - Incentives

Enclosure (4) - Surveillance Activity Checklist

Enclosure (1)

AIRBORNE MARITIME SURVIELLANCE SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

SOW Task Description

Performance Standard and Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)

Range clearing and telemetry service(s) provided to support USN range customers and other DoD agencies utilizing aircraft that possess and maintain a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness certificate and flight clearances.

The contractor shall provide services on-time, meeting all requirements of the task order, 98% of the time. Contractor must maintain FAA airworthiness certificate and flight clearances 100% of the time.

Flight crews provided that are trained and qualified and scheduled in accordance with FAA Part 135 rules and regulations.

Flight crews provided on-time, meeting all requirements of the task order, 95% of the time.

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

See enclosure 3.

Installers and maintainers provided to install, remove and maintain Government Furnished Equipment.

Installers and maintainers provided on-time, meeting all requirements of the task order, 95% of the time.

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

See enclosure 3.

Enclosure (2)

DATA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

SOW/CDRL Task Description

Method/

Measure Incentives

Contractor’s Progress, Status and Management Report

CDRL A001

100% Inspection by COR and/or technical points of contacts as indicated on CDRL.

See enclosure 3.

Contractor/Contract Fuel Tracking

CDRL A002

100% Inspection by COR and/or technical points of contacts as indicated on CDRL.

See enclosure 3.

Operations Security (OPSEC) Plan

CDRL A003

100% Inspection by COR and/or technical points of contacts as indicated on CDRL.

See enclosure 3.

Enclosure (3)

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this contract:

Year 1:

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuance of task orders in Year 2.*

Year 2:

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuance of task orders in Year 3.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuance of task orders in Year 4.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuance of task orders in Year 5.*

Year 5:

(-)Receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

* The Government reserves the right to not issue additional orders unless all regulatory requirements are met and the contractor meets the acceptable performance definition.

All SOW/CDRL tasks, including SOW/CDRL sub-tasks, will be assessed focusing on the following:

Quality of Product or Service – Assess the Contractor’s effort to transform operational needs and requirements into an integrated solution. Areas of focus may include the planning and management of program tasks, the quality of support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of program management specialties, management of interfaces, and the management of a totally integrated effort of all program management concerns to meet cost, performance, and schedule objectives. Assess how successfully the Contractor meets program quality.

Schedule – Assess the Contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule by assessing the Contractor’s efforts during the assessment period that contribute to or effect the schedule variance. Also address significance of scheduled events, discuss causes, and assess the effectiveness of Contractor corrective actions.

Cost Control – Assess the Contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. Is the Contractor experiencing cost growth or under run? If so, discuss the causes and Contractor-proposed solutions for the cost overruns. For contracts where task or contract sizing is based upon Contractor provided person-hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent to which the Contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility through the efficient use of resources in each work effort should be assessed.

Management Responsiveness – Assess the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals (especially responses to change orders, Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs), or other Unit Cost Accounting (UCAs), the Contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction. Consider the Contractor’s responsiveness to the program as it relates to meeting contract requirements during the period covered by the report.

Utilization of Small Business – FAR Subpart 19.7 and 15 U.S.C. 637 contains statutory requirements for complying with the Small Business Subcontracting Program. Assess whether the Contractor provided maximum practicable opportunity for Small Business (including Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) and Indian Tribes) (including Small Disadvantaged Businesses (which also includes ANCs and Indian Tribes), Women Owned Small Businesses, HUBZone, Veteran Owned, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business, Historically Black Colleges and Minority Institutions and ANCs and Indian Tribes that are not Small Disadvantaged Businesses or Small Businesses) to participate in contract performance consistent with efficient performance of the contract.

Other areas – Assess additional evaluation areas unique to the contract or that cannot be captured elsewhere.

The evaluation ratings are as follows:

Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.

Very Good - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

Satisfactory - Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task contain some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal - Performance does not meet contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed reflect 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.

Unsatisfactory – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the task or sub-task contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s actions appear or were ineffective.

Enclosure (4)

AIRBORNE MARITIME SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

Monthly Surveillance:

The COR will perform a monthly assessment of Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, Management Responsiveness, Utilization of Small Business, and Other Areas as applicable utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (4).

Provide Range clearing, and Telemetry system service(s) to support USN customers and other DoD agencies utilizing aircraft that possess and are maintained with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness certificate and flight clearances.

Provide flight crews that are trained, qualified, and scheduled in accordance with FAA Part 135 rules and regulations.

Provide installers and maintainers to install, remove, and maintain Government Furnished Equipment (GFE).

Contractor’s Progress, Status and Management Report

CDRL A001

Contractor/Contract Fuel Tracking

CDRL A002

Operations Security (OPSEC) Plan

CDRL A003

Monthly Summary of Ratings:

Quality of Product or Service Schedule

Number of Exceptional Number of Exceptional

Number of Very Good

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Marginal

Number of Unsatisfactory

Cost Control

Management Responsiveness

Number of Exceptional

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Marginal

Utilization of Small Business Other Areas

Number of Unsatisfactory

Surveillance:

The COR will perform a bi-annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in enclosure (4) and the monthly summary of ratings. This assessment will occur at the midpoint of the contract period.

Measure

Quality of Product or Service

TBD

TBD

Management Responsiveness

Utilization of Small Business Concerns

TBD

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-

SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY