Attachment_1_QASP.docx

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the Identification Systems Division Technical and Integration Services Single Award Task Order Contract

1. Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Technical and Integration Services to support the Identification Systems Division (IDS). The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics and the Government receives the required quality of services for tasks ordered under the contract.

This contract will provide technical and integration support services for the Identification Systems (IDS) Division that are essential to mission functions. These services support the mission of NAWCAD Patuxent River, Identification Systems (IDS) Division, Code 4.11.2, St. Inigoes, MD. Specifically, the contractor shall provide or assist the Government in providing design, development, integration, test and evaluation, installation, fielding, certification, maintenance, and logistic support of Cooperative Identification (ID); Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR); Air Traffic Control (ATC) equipment, systems and subsystems; and advanced technologies development.

This performance-based Single Award Task Order Contract will have Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) labor CLINs and Cost CLINs for Other Direct Charges (ODCs) (Material, Travel, Calibration and Shipyard Services). The contract will be for a four-year ordering period. 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 inspections and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts and this contract, 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 QASP. Within a Quality Control 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 contract.

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 contract.

4. Government Resources

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

Contracting Officer (CO): A person duly appointed with the authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)) or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)) contracts/task orders and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract is AIR-2.5.1.4. 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.

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

Government Project Leads – The COR designates an individual Government Project Lead to assist in administering a specific project under the contract.

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 (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.

Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representative (ACOR) – The ACOR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance in the absence of the COR. The ACOR 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.

Government Project Leads – The Government Project Lead is responsible for assisting in administering a specific project under the contract. A Government Project Lead cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the contract, make commitments or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf .

6. Methods of QA Surveillance

a. Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS): The Government will perform an evaluation that addresses quality, schedule, cost control, management, regulatory compliance, utilization of small business, and other important areas using the CPARS format annually covering the previous 12 months. The marketplace for integration, design and technical support services is very competitive; as such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this contract. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and future orders, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool.

b. QASP - The below listed methods of surveillance (Enclosures 1 and 2) shall be used by the COR and Government Project Leads 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 (Enclosure 3) provided herein.

c. Observation, Feedback, and Review – Unscheduled, on-site observation of products and services provided by the Contractor, and recurring review of Contractor submitted reports and documentation identified in the CDRLs will be performed by the COR and ACOR. Feedback from Cooperative ID, NCTR, and ATC customers will be collected and used by the COR to document surveillance of technical performance.

7. Surveillance

Continuous monitoring of the Contractor should be performed. Invoices should be reviewed by the COR as submitted and any discrepancies reported immediately to the Contracting Officer. Enclosures (1) and (2) set forth the performance standards, incentives, and surveillance methods for the Contractor, COR, ACOR, and Government Project Leads while enclosure (3) provides the checklist and means for the COR to document on a quarterly basis the results of the surveillance and shall be provided to the Contracting Officer on a quarterly basis. As this is a single award task order contract, monitoring of individual task orders will be conducted on an ongoing basis. However, formal surveillance documentation will be completed at the contract level, taking into consideration all efforts being performed on each task order in the respective evaluation period.

8. Documentation

In addition to providing quarterly reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance file within the CORT (Contracting Officer’s Representative Tool) system. 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 Surveillance Activity Checklist. 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 contract.

9. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) – Performance and Data Standards Enclosure (2) – Incentives Enclosure (3) – Surveillance Activity Checklist N00421-15-R-0023 Attachment 1

N00421-15-R-0023 Attachment 1

1 Enclosure 1 Source Selection Information See FAR 3.104 and 2.101 Source Selection Information See FAR 3.104 and 2.101

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

PWS 3.11 Assist in shipping and receiving of components and parts as required via other countries as part of providing parts and assistance to United States vessels that are located in and around those countries.

DATA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

See enclosure 2.

N00421-15-R-0023 Enclosure (1)

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this contract.

Incentives

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition. CPARS documented accordingly.

The following incentives shall apply to performance of the task orders under this contract.

See below

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

See below.

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

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of option. 3.*

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of option. 4.*

See below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition which will result in a marginal or unsatisfactory final CPARS rating.*

* The government reserves the right to not exercise options unless all regulatory requirements are met and the contractor meets the acceptable performance definition.

All PBSOW/CDRL efforts will be assessed focusing on the following:

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

Quality – Assess the achieved product performance relative to performance parameters required by the contract/order. Assess the contractor's effort to transform operational needs and requirements into an integrated system design solution. Areas of focus should be the planning and control of technical program tasks, integration, management of interfaces, interoperability, and the management of a totally integrated effort to meet cost, technical performance, and schedule objectives. The evaluation should cover these disciplines: systems architecture, design, manufacturing, integration and support, configuration control, documentation, test and evaluation. The evaluation for test and evaluation should consider success/problems/failure in developing test and evaluation objectives; planning (ground/air/sea) test, simulations and/or demonstrations; in accomplishing those objectives and on the timeliness of coordination and feedback of the test results (simulations/demonstrations) into the design and/or manufacturing process. Other activities include: producibility engineering, logistics support analysis, supportability considerations (maintenance personnel/skills availability or work-hour constraints, operating and cost constraints, allowable downtime, turn-around-time to service/maintain the system, standardization requirements), survivability, human factors, reliability, quality, maintainability, availability, inspectability, etc.

Assess the success of the contractor's performance in accomplishing logistics planning. For example, maintenance planning; manpower and personnel; supply support; support equipment; technical provisioning data; training and support; computer resources support; facilities; packaging, handling, storage and transportation; design interface; the contractor's performance of logistics support analysis activities and the contractor's ability to successfully support fielded equipment. When the contract/order requires technical and/or engineering data deliverables, the cognizant cataloging and/or standardization activity comments should be solicited.

Assess how successfully the contractor meets program quality objectives; e.g., producibility, reliability, maintainability, inspectability, testability, and system safety, and controls the overall process. The PM or contracting officer must be flexible in how contractor success is measured, e.g., data from design test/operational testing successes, field reliability and maintainability and failure reports, user comments and acceptance rates, and improved subcontractor and vendor quality.

Assess all the other technical activity critical to successful contract/order performance. Identify any additional evaluation aspects that are unique to the contract/order or that cannot be captured in another sub-element.

Schedule – Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance).

This evaluation of the contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule should include the contractor’s efforts during the evaluation period that contribute to or affect the schedule variance. Also, address significance of scheduled events (e.g., design reviews), discuss causes, and assess the effectiveness of contractor corrective actions.

This element applies to contract/order closeout activities as well as contract/order performance. Instances of adverse actions such as the evaluation of liquidated damages or issuance of Cure Notices, Show Cause Notices, and Delinquency Notices is indicators of problems, which may have resulted in variance to the contract/order schedule and should be noted in the evaluation.

Questions to consider include the following:

· Is the contractor completing the design/engineering services activities in a timely manner? This includes administrative activities, as well as meeting all scheduled milestones in the design process.

· Did the contractor adequately schedule the work?

· Has the contractor met administrative milestone dates?

· Has the contractor met physical milestone dates specified by contract/order or agreed to in the project schedule?

· If the schedule has slipped through the contractor’s fault or negligence, has he taken appropriate corrective action of his own volition?

· Has the contractor furnished all required deliverables on or ahead of schedule?

· Has the contract furnished updated project schedules on a timely basis?

Cost Control – Assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract/order cost. If the contractor is experiencing cost growth or underrun, discuss the causes and contractor-proposed solutions for the cost overruns or underruns. For contracts/orders where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor-provided person hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate task 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. Include, as applicable, the following information:

· Does the contractor keep within the total estimated cost (what is the relationship of the negotiated costs and budgeted costs to actuals)?

· Did the contractor do anything innovative that resulted in cost savings?

· Were billings current, accurate and complete?

· Are the contractor’s budgetary internal controls adequate?

· Has the contractor provided a design that can be constructed with the available funds?

· Has the contractor notified the Government and taken necessary corrective actions when the cost estimate exceeds available funds?

Management – Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract/order, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts. Include, as applicable, information on the following:

· Is the contractor oriented toward the customer?

· Is interaction between the contractor and the government satisfactory or does it need improvement?

· Include the adequacy of the contractor’s accounting, billing, and estimating systems and the contractor’s management of Government Furnished Property (GFP) if a substantial amount of GFP has been provided to the contractor under the contract/order.

· Address the timeliness of awards to subcontractors and management of subcontractors, including subcontract costs. Consider efforts taken to ensure early identification of subcontract problems and the timely application of corporate resources to preclude subcontract problems from impacting overall prime contractor performance.

· Assess the prime contractor’s effort devoted to managing subcontracts and whether subcontractors were an integral part of the contractor’s team. Are the contractor’s management, on-site, and home office personnel exhibiting the capacity to adequately plan, schedule, resource, organize and otherwise manage the work? If not, describe and relate to other rated elements.

Regulatory Compliance – Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order related to applicable regulations and codes. Consider aspects of performance such as compliance with financial, environmental (example: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act), safety, and labor regulations as well as any other reporting requirements in the contract. Consider questions such as the following:

Has the contractor complied with all contract clauses and reporting requirements (e.g., FAPIIS, FAR Subsection 9.104-6, FAR Clause 52.209-9)?

· Has the contractor complied with Cost Accounting Standards and disclosure statements (FAR Subpart 30.2, FAR Clauses 52.230-2, 52.230-3, 52.230-6)?

· Has the contractor complied with the reporting requirements relating to recovered material content utilized in contract performance (see FAR Subpart 23.4)?

· Has the contractor complied with contractual safety requirements and labor laws (see FAR Subsection 22.407, FAR Clause 52.222-4)?

· Perform engineering surveillance to assess compliance with contractual terms for schedule, cost, and technical performance in the areas of design, development, and production (FAR Subpart 42.302).

· Has the contractor complied with specifications or other contractual requirements requiring the delivery or use of environmentally preferable products, energy-efficient products, products containing recovered materials, and biobased products (FAR Subparts 23.2, 23.4, 23.7)? Monitor the contractor's environmental practices for adverse impact on contract performance or contract cost, and for compliance with environmental requirements specified in the contract.

· Is the contractor complying with affirmative action and EEO compliance requirements (see FAR Subpart 22.8, FAR Clause 52.222-26)?

· Has the contractor complied with combating trafficking in persons (see FAR Subpart 22.17, FAR Clause 52.222-50)

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, and ANCs and Indian Tribes that are not Small Disadvantaged Businesses or Small Businesses) to participate in contract/order performance consistent with efficient performance of the contract/order. Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to Small Business participation (including FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Businesses and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (when required). Assess any small business participation goals, which are stated separately in the contract/order. Assess achievement on each individual goal stated within the contract/order or subcontracting plan including good faith effort if the goal was not achieved.

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.

Attachment 1 Enclosure (2)

Enclosure (2)

8 Enclosure 2 Source Selection Information See FAR 3.104 and 2.101 Source Selection Information See FAR 3.104 and 2.101

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

Quarterly Surveillance:

The COR will perform quarterly assessments of Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, Management, Regulatory Compliance, Utilization of Small Business, and Other Areas as applicable utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed above.

Completed

Control

Compliance Utilization of Small Business Other

Completed

Control

Compliance Utilization of Small Business Other

PWS 3.11 Assist in shipping and receiving of components and parts as required via other countries as part of providing parts and assistance to United States vessels that are located in and around those countries.

Completed

Control

Compliance Utilization of Small Business Other

N00024-13-R-3035

Enclosure (3)

12 Enclosure 3 Source Selection Information See FAR 3.104 and 2.101 Source Selection Information See FAR 3.104 and 2.101 Quarterly Summary of Ratings:

Checklist Completed By: ____________________________

Date Completed: ____________________________

Annual Surveillance:

The COR will perform an annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (2). This annual assessment will occur at the end of each year and cover the previous 12 months.

Checklist Completed By: ____________________________

Date Completed: ____________________________