Attachment_004_QASP.doc

N00421-15-R-0003

ATTACHMENT 004

N00421-15-R-0003

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION (RDT&E) LAB AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) SUPPORT 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 the administration of the performance-based task order. 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 task order.

This contract requirement is for providing technical and management support services for RDT&E Infrastructure Division which is responsible for the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) RDT&E network infrastructure. Additionally, this division provides the support and serves as the Navy Functional Area Management (FAM)/ IT Portfolio Manager for the Navy’s RDT&E labs. The RDT&E Infrastructure division also provides information assurance support via the RDT&E Lab Information Assurance Support Team (RLIST) to our RDT&E labs, providing assistance and technical expertise to ensure compliance with various IA mandates and supporting the Certification and Accreditation (C&A) process. This division also provides various other IT and consulting type functions in support of the Navy’s RDT&E Labs in support of the RDT&E Executive which is a NAVAIR 5.4 function, including supporting the Service Management Office (SMO) within 5.4.1.2.

The performance-based task order will have Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee labor CLINs and Cost-Reimbursement Other Direct Cost (ODC) CLINs. The contract will consist of a twelve-month period of performance with four (4) additional twelve-month option periods. 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 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 46.4 – Government Contract Quality Assurance, which requires quality assurance, inspection and acceptance of the services, and the associated documentation called for in service contracts to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized Government 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 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan. The contractor, and 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 AIR-2.5.1.6. 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’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 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 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.

Contracting Officer’s 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 QA Surveillance a.

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) – The marketplace 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 midpoint of each period of performance. This evaluation will be one determinant in exercising an option. The Government for this procurement 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 order, 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 surveillance is the Surveillance Activity Checklist provided herein.

7.

Surveillance

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

8.

Documentation

In addition to providing a quarterly report 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, including the originals of the Quality Assurance Checklists. 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) – Performance Standards

Enclosure (2) - Data Performance Standards

Enclosure (3) - Incentives

Enclosure (4) - Surveillance Activity Checklist

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

PWS Task Description

DATA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Method/

Measure Incentives

See enclosure 3.

See enclosure 3.

See enclosure 3.

See enclosure 3.

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this order.

Incentives

Base:

None of the measurement areas are rated “Marginal” or below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of an option 1.*

Option 1:

Not more than 2 of the measurement areas rated below “Very Good”. None of the measurement areas are rated “Marginal” or below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of an option. 2.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition. Documented in CPARs.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition. Documented in CPARs.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition. Documented in CPARs.

* The Government will not exercise an option unless all regulatory and statutory requirements are met and the contractor is rated “Satisfactory” or better.

All PWS/CDRL tasks, including PWS/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 affect 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 underrun? 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.

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 contractor’s success with timely award and management of subcontracts, including whether the contractor met small/small disadvantage 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.

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.

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

Monthly Surveillance:

The COR will perform a monthly assessment of Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, Business Relations, Management, and Other Areas as applicable utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in enclosure 3.

Measure

Other

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

Monthly Summary of Ratings:

Quality

Schedule

Number of Exceptional Number of Exceptional

Number of Very Good Number of Very Good

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Marginal Number of Marginal

Number of Unsatisfactory Number of Unsatisfactory

Cost Control

Business Relations

Number of Marginal

Number of Unsatisfactory

Management

Other Areas

Number of Exceptional

Number of Unsatisfactory

Semi-Annual Surveillance:

The COR will perform a semi-annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in enclosure 3 and the monthly summary of ratings.

Measure