CAS_PROPS_QASP(Final)12APR16.pdf

RFP# N00421-16-R-0018

Services Acquisition Strategy (MOPAS) Attachment 1

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

For Contracted Air Services (CAS) PROPS

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 based service 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 contract.

This QASP describes how the Government will observe, evaluate, and document the Contractor’s performance in meeting the critical performance standards identified in the contract. Specifically, the QASP will identify the Government resources responsible for monitoring performance and surveillance methods that will be utilized in determining the quality level of services and products delivered under the contract. The intent is to establish and properly execute a QASP that will assist the Government in obtaining services from the Contractor.

This contract requirement, in support of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), Contracted Air Services (CAS) Program Office (PMA-226), is to acquire a Contractor owned, operated and maintained twin propeller aircraft, personnel and equipment to support Fleet training and exercises to a variety of customers to include: United States Navy (USN), Foreign

Military Sales (FMS), other Department of Defense (DoD) agencies and DoD Contractors. These services will provide a variety of airborne threat simulation capabilities to train ship board and aircraft squadron weapon systems operators and aircrew to counter potential enemy Electronic

Warfare (EW). These services will be provided at a variety of locations including multiple

Continental United States (CONUS) sites and foreign and remote operating bases outside

CONUS. Operations will normally be conducted in designated warning areas around Norfolk, Virginia and Jacksonville, Florida, on the East Coast, San Diego and North Island, California, on the West Coast, the Gulf Coast, Hawaii and Japan. The Contractor will operate and maintain its assets under applicable Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations.

The resultant contract is expected to be a performance-based Indefinite Delivery Indefinite

Quantity (IDIQ) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract (with a Cost Contract Line Item Number

(CLIN) for Travel, a Cost CLIN for Material, and one Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) CLIN for

Future Threat Requirements. The contract will consist of one base year with four one-year 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 Contract Section E – Inspection and

Acceptance, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in the contract, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

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 in the contract.

The QASP, however, 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 – 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-2.5.1.13. 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 service contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

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

Government Flight Representative (GFR) – The GFR is responsible for surveillance of

Contractor ground operations involving Government aircraft. GFR duties and responsibilities are described in DCMA INST 8210.1C, Chapter 7 (NAVAIRINST 3710.1G).

Program Manager (PM)/CAS Integrated Product Team Lead (IPTL) – The PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the COR, and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. The IPTL executes the program as the PM’s primary representative. The PM for this contract is PMA-226.

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

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

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. In addition to the continuous monitoring of performance, the COR will also submit an annual assessment in the Navy’s Contractor

Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). For CPARS, the COR assesses general quality of the product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, small business compliance, and other important areas. Any changes that the Contractor deems may affect contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

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

Government Flight Representative (GFR) – The GFR is responsible for surveillance of

Contractor ground operations involving Government aircraft. GFR duties and responsibilities are described in DCMA INST 8210.1C, Chapter 7 (NAVAIRINST 3710.1G).

Program Manager (PM)/ CAS Integrated Product Team Lead (IPTL) – The Program

Manager (PM) provides primary program oversight, nominates the Contracting Officer’s

Representative (COR), and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. The IPTL executes the program as the PM’s primary representative. The PM for this contract is PMA-226.

6. Methods of QA Surveillance

a. Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – The market place for

Contracted Air Services is becoming very competitive. 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 performance of each sequential option period. The Government for this procurement will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, utilization of small business, 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 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, incentives, and surveillance methods for the Contractor and the COR while enclosure (4) provides the checklist and means for

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

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 Quality Assurance file within the Contracting Officer’s Representative Tool (CORT).

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 contract.

The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the contract.

9. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) – Contracted Air Service Performance Standards

Enclosure (2) – Data Performance Standards

Enclosure (3) – Incentives

Enclosure (4) – Surveillance Activity Checklist

Enclosure (1)

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

CONTRACTED AIR SERVICES PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

PBWS Task Description

Performance Standard and Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Surveillance

Method/Measure

Incentives

Customer billing and work tracking

The Contractor shall use a government-approved system to support customer billing and work tracking of not less than 95% accuracy on each individual customer invoice.

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

See Enclosure 3.

Task status tracking

The contractor shall use a government-approved task tracking system to track 100% of task status.

100% Inspection by COR, PMA and customer feedback.

See

Management of government owned property

The Contractor shall maintain, at a 95% operational status, GFP in a manner that is consistent with established preventive maintenance practices and operated in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws.

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

** Provide Props flight hours/* mission success rate(SCHEDULE)

The contractor shall complete assigned tasks within a given place and timeframe with a 86% to 100% accuracy rate – (*flight hours flown/hours scheduled = mission success rate)

** Grading criteria includes Quality of Service, Schedule and Business Relations (see enclosure 4)

Below 60% Unsatisfactory

61-85% Marginal

86-90% Satisfactory

91-96% Very Good

97-100% Exceptional

Enclosure (2)

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

DATA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

PBWS/CDRL Task

Description

Standard AQL Surveillance

Method/

Measure

Airworthiness Certification

Data (A001)

Submission is in accordance with the DID cited in the CDRL.

95% acceptable on first submission to Government; 100% acceptable on 2nd submission to Government

100% Inspection by

COR and/or ACOR.

See Enclosure 3.

Fuel Chit Report (A002)

Government; 100% acceptable on 2nd

Contractors Progress, Status and Management Report

(A003)

Government; 100% acceptable on 2nd

Enclosure (3)

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this contract.

Assessment Period Acceptable Performance

Definition

How Measured

Base:

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

See below.

Midpoint of the assessment period (6th month) evaluation using the CPARS format covering the previous 6 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of option 1.*

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

Option 1:

below “Satisfactory”. None of the measurement areas are period (18th month) evaluation using the CPARS format covering the previous 12 condition for exercise of an option. 2.*

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

Option 2:

below “Very Good”. Not more than 1 of the measurement areas rated below “Satisfactory”. None of the measurement areas are period (30th month) evaluation using the CPARS format covering the previous 12 condition for exercise of an option. 3.*

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

Option 3: Not more than 2 of the measurement areas rated below “Very Good”. Not more than 1 of the measurement areas rated below “Satisfactory”. None of the measurement areas are rated below “Marginal”.

See below.

Midpoint of the assessment period (42nd month) evaluation using the CPARS format covering the previous

12 months.

condition for exercise of an option. 4.*

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

Option 4: Not more than 2 of the measurement areas rated below “Very Good”. Not more than 1 of the measurement areas rated below “Satisfactory”. None of the measurement areas are rated below “Marginal”.

See below.

Midpoint of the assessment period (54th month) evaluation using the CPARS format covering the previous 12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for satisfactory or better Final CAPARS rating.*

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

* The Government will not exercise option 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

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

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 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.

Enclosure (4)

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.

Description

Surveillance Method/ Measure

Date

Planned

Date

Completed

Quality Schedule Cost

Control

Business

Relations

Mgmt.

Other

Assess customer billing and work

TBD

Assess task status

TBD

Assess management of

Government owned property

TBD

Monthly Status

Reports

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback

TBD

Flight Hour/log/fuel

Report

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback

TBD

Airworthiness Report

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback

Monthly Summary of Ratings:

Quality of Product or Service 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 Very Good ____ Number of Very Good ____

Number of Satisfactory ____ Number of Satisfactory ____

Management Other Areas

Number of Very Good ____ Number of Very Good ____

Number of Satisfactory ____ Number of Satisfactory ____

Annual Surveillance:

The COR will perform an annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure 3 and the monthly summary of ratings. This annual assessment will occur at the midpoint of each period and cover the previous 12 months, except for the base period which will cover only the previous 6 months.

Description Surveillance Method/Measure Date Planned Date Completed Summary Rating/Results

Quality of Product or

Service

Review of Monthly Ratings.

Schedule

Review of Monthly Ratings.

Cost Control

Review of Monthly Ratings

Business Relations

Management

Other Areas