Attachment_7_QASP_TPS_Flt_Inst.doc

PID/PR 10212730

MOPAS2 Attachment 1

Attachment P-7

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

For United States Naval Test Pilot School

Ground and Flight Instructional Support 1.

Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the performance based contract. 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 in the order.

This contract requirement is for ground and flight instructional support services to the United States Naval Test Pilot School at the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division Patuxent River. Specifically, the contractor shall provide support in the areas of fixed-wing, rotary-wing, and airborne systems classroom, ground, and flight instruction and training/curriculum analysis. The resulting contract vehicle will be a single award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) competitively awarded by the NAVAIR contracting office. The performance-based contract will have fixed priced labor CLINs and a cost reimbursable CLIN for travel. The contract will consist of a five year ordering period, with monthly lots of instructor training on individual Task Orders. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

2.

Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in contracts, 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 a Quality Control Plan and a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan. The Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the order.

The QASP on the other hand, is put in place to provide Government surveillance 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 Mr. Daniel Chambers, AIR-2.5.1.12. The ACO will be designated in the resulting order. Contracting Officers are designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority.

Contracting Officer’s 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 appointed in the resulting task order(s). 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 United States 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. The Contracting Officer for this contract is Mr. Benjamin Washburn, AIR-2.5.1.12.1.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – 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 QA Surveillance a.

Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – The market place for technical support is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror will have a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this contract. Additionally, the CPARS rating will be one determinant in issuing subsequent orders. The Government for this procurement will address the quality of product or service, 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.

b.

QASP - The methods of surveillance listed in the following sections shall be used by the COR in the technical administration of this QASP.

7.

Surveillance

Enclosures (1) and (2) set forth the performance standards and surveillance methods for the contractor and COR. Enclosure (3) provides the checklist and means for the COR to document the results of the surveillance. Enclosure (3) shall be provided to the Contracting Officer on a quarterly basis.

8.

Documentation

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. All such records will be maintained for the life of the order. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the order.

9.

Enclosures

Enclosure (1) - Technical Support Performance Standards

Enclosure (2) - Incentives

Enclosure (3) - Definitions for Evaluation Areas/ Ratings Enclosure (4) – Surveillance Activity Checklist

Encl. (1)

CLASSROOM, GROUND AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Airborne Instruction

(Fixed Wing)

Classroom Instruction

(Fixed Wing)

100% of exercise material updated 30 days prior to classroom presentation Government Observation & Analysis

Airborne Instruction

(Rotary Wing)

Classroom Instruction

(Rotary Wing)

100% of exercise material updated 30 days prior to classroom presentation Government Observation & Analysis

Airborne Instruction

(Airborne Systems)

Classroom Instruction

(Airborne Systems)

100% of exercise material updated 30 days prior to classroom presentation Government Observation & Analysis

Ground Familiarization Instruction (Fixed Wing and/or Rotary Wing)

Classroom Instruction

(Fixed Wing and/or Rotary Wing)

100% of exercise material updated 30 days prior to classroom presentation Government Observation & Analysis

100% of documentation is accurate.

Government Observation & Analysis

Travel

Encl. (2)

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this order.

Incentives

YEAR 1

All measurement areas rated “Satisfactory” or above.

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for ordering in Year 2.*

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for ordering in Year 3.*

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for ordering in Year 4.*

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for ordering in Year 5.*

See below.

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

All PWS tasks will be assessed focusing on the following:

Quality of Product or Service – Assess the contractor’s effort to provide technically sound instructional services. Areas of focus may include development of exercise material, the quality of support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of aircraft platforms with exercises, quality of student interface, and quality of ground and flight instruction provided. 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 as compared to government requirements. Also address significance of scheduled events (i.e., design reviews), discuss causes, and assess the effectiveness of contractor corrective actions.

Business Relations – Assess the timelines, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction.

Management – Assess the extent to which the contractor discharges its responsibility for instruction and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract; identifies and applies resources required to meet schedule requirements; assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by contract; communicates appropriate information to affected program elements in a timely manner. Assess the contractor’s risk mitigation plans. If applicable, identify any other management areas that are unique to the contract.

Other areas – Assess those evaluation areas that are unique to the contract, or that aren’t captured elsewhere.

The evaluation ratings are:

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 some 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 (3): DEFINITIONS FOR EVALUATION AREAS/RATINGS

3.1 This section describes the metrics used to measure contractor schedule and performance.

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 task, 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 (i.e., design reviews), 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 tasks 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.

Business Relations – Assess the timelines, completeness, and quality of a problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction.

Management – Assess the contractor’s success with timely award and management of subcontracts, including whether the contractor met small/small disadvantages and women-owned business participation goals. Discuss the extent to which the contractor discharges its responsibility for integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract; identifies and applies resources required to meet schedule requirements; assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by contract; communicates appropriate information to affected program elements in a timely manner. Assess the contractor’s risk mitigation plans. If applicable, identify any other management areas that are unique to the contract.

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

All efforts performed under the PBSOW and Government Furnished format reporting will be measured in accordance with the following evaluation rating.

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 tasks 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 contractor’s performance of the task or sub-task contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s actions appear or were ineffective.

ENCLOSURE (4): SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

-Observation

-Platform coordinator feedback

TBA

-Sortie completion summaries

-Feedback from line activities

TBA

Collect and review personnel flight qualifications and currency in accordance with applicable documents. Maintain daily Personnel Flight Qualifications and Currency. Submit per Government Furnished Format no later than 10 working days following end of month.

Track and coordinate travel and material requirements through the use of current inventory and travel databases.

-Demonstration

-Observation

TBA

-Inspection

TBA

-Inspection

TBA

Coordinate Long Range Planner through accurate aircraft usage trend analysis, detailed sortie breakdown, weekly program and flight hour summaries.

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

PAGE

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY