QASP_AAR.doc

RFP# N00421-16-R-0032

12 Jan 2018

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

For Air to Air Refueling (AAR) Services 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 contract. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics, the Government receives the quality of services required under the contract, and that the actual performance results are documented in accordance with this plan.

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 and task orders. 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.

The contract requirement, in support of Contracted Air Services (CAS) Program Management AIR (PMA) 226, is to acquire Air to Air Refueling (AAR) services for Department of the Navy (DoN) Fleet customers utilizing aircraft that possess and are maintained with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness certificate and flight clearances. Other customers for CAS under this contract may include other Department of Defense (DoD) agencies and services, non-DoD Government agencies, and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers.

The resultant contract is anticipated to be a performance-based Single Award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract. This contract will have a Four-Year and 364 day ordering period; however, any task order issued shall not extend past the final day of the ordering of this contract. 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 Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in the contract 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, 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 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-2.5.1.13. 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 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 contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

Government Flight Representative (GFR) – A United States (US) Military Officer or similarly qualified civilian with the responsibility for oversight of public aircraft operations conducted by commercial contractors.

Program Manager (PM)/CAS Integrated Product Team Lead (IPTL) – As part of PMA 226, the PM manages and supports specialized and proven aircraft platforms & systems to include CAS acquisition, PAO Declaration and Airworthiness.

5.

Responsibilities

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

Contracting Officer – The Contracting Officer shall monitor performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguard 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.

COR/ACOR – The COR/ACOR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. In addition to the continuous monitoring of performance, the COR/ACOR will also submit an annual assessment in the Navy’s Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). In CPARS, the COR/ACOR assesses general quality of the services, schedule, business relations, management, and other important areas. The COR/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 and terms or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

GFR – The GFR is responsible for surveillance of Contractor ground operations involving CAS aircraft. GFR duties and responsibilities are described in DCMA INST 8210.1C, Chapter 7 (NAVAIRINST 3710.1G).

PM/CAS 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, which includes designating the Scheduling Officers to execute administrative tasks such as mission scheduling, coordination, prioritization of CAS and invoice inspection. The PM for this contract is PMA-226.

6.

Methods of Quality Assurance 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 annually inclusive of all task orders awarded during the applicable annual rating period. This evaluation will be one determinant in the continuation of issuing task orders under this contract. The Government will address the quality of the services, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, and other important areas for this procurement. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and the continuation of the contract, the CPARS evaluation 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 as Enclosure (4) herein.

7.

Surveillance

Enclosures (1), (2), and (3) set forth the CAS performance standards, data performance standards, and incentives for the Contractor and the 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 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 each task order.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the contractor's task manager or on-site representative. A CDR template is attached to this QASP enclosure (5).

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR. The Government will review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

The COR may initiate a CDR at any time, including whenever the number of monthly recorded defects for a performance standard exceeds the allowable number of defects; anytime unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal corrective action; and, whenever an unfavorable trend is detected in contractor performance 9.

Enclosures

Enclosure (1) – Contracted Air Service Performance Standards Enclosure (2) - Data Performance Standards Enclosure (3) - Incentives Enclosure (4) - Surveillance Activity Checklist

Enclosure (5) – Contract Discrepancy Report Enclosure (1)

CONTRACTED AIR SERVICES PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

PWS Task Description

Provide the prescribed aircraft and required crew 95% of the time to be mission effective.

100% = Exceptional

98% = Very Good

95% = Satisfactory

90% = Marginal <90% = Unsatisfactory 100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

Example:

Mission Effectiveness is the total sorties flown in which the aircraft functions as required by the PWS and in accordance with scheduled flights prescribed by Scheduling Officer (SO) divided into the total sorties scheduled to achieve percentage (e.g. 49 flown/50 scheduled = 98%). Excludes canceled sorties by customer or due to weather related occurrences.

See enclosure 3.

Provide qualified flight crews per PWS requirements to support mandatory mission requirement profile 95% of the time for each scheduled mission.

100% = Exceptional 98% = Very Good 95% = Satisfactory 91% = Marginal <90% = Unsatisfactory 100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

Example:

Take total mission requirement profile in accordance with scheduled flights prescribed by Scheduling Officer (SO) and divide into the total requirement profiles scheduled to achieve percentage (e.g. 49 mission profiles met satisfactorily/50 scheduled = 98%) Excludes canceled sorties by customer or due to weather related incidences.

See enclosure 3.

See enclosure 3.

Contractor shall account for all GFE with a goal of 100% accuracy and a Satisfactory metric of 95%. Reports shall be submitted in accordance with CDRL A007.

100% = Exceptional 97% = Very Good 95% = Satisfactory 90% = Marginal <90% = Unsatisfactory Government performed random on-site physical audits combined with 100% inspection by COR of GFE reports submitted per CDRL A007 of Contractor assigned GFE against the contract master list of assigned GFR.

Example:

Take total number of GFE items issued from the Government to the Contractor compared to the 1149 list and complete reports submitted. And/or Take total GFE items accounted for during physical audit and divide by total GFE issued by Government to derive percentage (299/300 = 99.7%) See enclosure 3.

Contractor shall maintain compliance with all safety requirements by category:

1. Aircraft air & ground mishaps

2. Non-compliance with hazmat policy.

Contractor goal is 100% compliance with a Satisfactory metric of 98% 100% = Exceptional

99% = Very Good

98% = Satisfactory

97% = Marginal

<97% = Unsatisfactory

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback. Example:

Take total days where an incident has occurred and subtract that from the total number of days in the CPAR cycle...then divide that number by total number of days in the CPAR cycle to derive percentage (360/365 = 98.6%).

Sec enclosure 3.

Contractor shall maintain 95% accurate fuel consumption tracking between fuel cards/fuel receipts, flight logs and fuel receipts, with a goal of 100% accurate tracking.

100% = Exceptional

97% = Very Good 95% = Satisfactory 90% = Marginal <90% = Unsatisfactory 100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback.

Example:

Provide evidence that the fuel card charge receipts match with flight log and fuel receipts. Take total fuel transactions (receipt amounts and gallons dispensed) and compare/match aggregate cost & gallons & fuel log & flight log. Perform sample audit each month of transaction IAW

MIL-STD-105D using normal, single sample plan using Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) 0.4 or 4%. Use table I General Inspection Level II for sample size determination. Use table II-A for sample plan. Aggregate 12 months of audits into % compliance. Take each months results (pass/fail) 12/12=100% compliance.

See enclosure 3.

Enclosure (2)

DATA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Method/

Measure Incentives

See Enclosure 3.

See Enclosure 3.

Operations Security (OPSEC) Plan (A003)

See Enclosure 3.

See Enclosure 3.

See Enclosure 3.

See Enclosure 3.

See Enclosure 3.

Enclosure (3)

INCENTIVES

Incentives

(+) Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuing new task order(s) for second year ordering period.*

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

Annual assessment period (24th month into contract period) evaluation using the CPARS format covering the previous 12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuing new task order(s) in year 3.* (+) Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuing new task order(s) for third year ordering period.*

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

12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuing new task order(s) in year 4.* (+) Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuing new task order(s) for fourth year ordering period.*

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

(+) Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for issuing new task order(s) for fifth year ordering period.*

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

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

* The Government will not issue new task orders unless all regulatory requirements are met and the contractor meets the acceptable performance definition.

**Evaluation Ratings will be in accordance with FAR 42.1503.

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

Quality of the Services – 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 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 contractor’s success with timely award and management of subcontracts, including whether the contractor met small/small disadvantaged 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 Format Used:

The COR will perform an annual assessment of Quality, Schedule, Business Relations, Management Responsiveness, and Other Areas as applicable utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (3).

Schedule Metric =

= CPAR

As described above in

Enclosure 1& 2 100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback

TBD

Monthly Summary of Ratings:

Quality of Service

Schedule

Number of Exceptional

Number of Very Good

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Marginal

Number of Unsatisfactory

Business Relations

Management

Other Areas

Number of Unsatisfactory

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.

Description

Enclosure (5)

Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR)

1. Contract Number:

2. TO: (Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative)

3. FROM: (Name of COR)

4. Date and time observed discrepancy:

5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM:

6. Corrective action plan:

A written corrective action plan (is/is not) required.

The written Corrective Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than (xx) days after receipt of this CDR.

Prepared by: COR

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative

Date

Received by:

Signature - Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative Date