0089_Attachment_1_SAC.pdf

N00421-16-R-0089

For Official Use Only

Source Selection Sensitive. See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Attachment (1)

Surveillance Activity Checklist for AIR-4.1 Sustainment Engineering, Training and Tools Services

1. Purpose

This Surveillance Activity Checklist (SAC) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the Statement of Work (SOW). 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 and task orders.

The contract requirement is for systems engineering, analysis, development, integration, testing, and fleet introduction and support of warfare systems into Naval Aircraft. This includes direct systems engineering support throughout the full life cycle of a weapon system from concept development through disposal, and is applied to all Naval Aircraft (Tactical, Vertical Lift, Maritime, UAV’s, Targets, and advanced weapons), Foreign Military Sales (FMS), and support systems. The resultant contract will be a non-performance based

Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) Contract Line Item

Numbers (CLINs); with a five (5) year ordering period. A properly executed SAC will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement and provide the Contractor with clearly defined performance expectations.

2. Authority

Authority for issuance of this SAC is provided in the contract under Section E, Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation required 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 and the SAC. 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 and task orders. The SAC is executed to provide Government surveillance and oversight of the Contractor’s quality control efforts to ensure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering the results as specified in the contract and task orders.

4. Government Resources

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

Contracting Officer – The person duly appointed with the authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting

Officer (PCO)) or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)) contracts and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract is Ms. Melinda K. Stann, AIR-2.5.1.5. 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) – The individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as their authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. The COR will be designated in the resulting contract and individual task orders. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of designation.

For Official Use Only

Source Selection Information. See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

5. Responsibilities

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

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.

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 and task order price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

6. Methods of Surveillance

a. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) – The marketplace for contractor support services is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government-generated CPARS ratings for this contract and task orders, as a substandard rating could have an adverse impact on future proposal evaluations. Additionally, the CPARS ratings will be the determinant in awarding follow-on task orders. For this procurement, the Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, and management responsiveness. As this information may affect future source selections throughout the Department of Defense (DoD), as well as the continuation of this contract, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool along with the SAC.

b. SAC - The below listed methods of surveillance will be used by the COR in the technical administration of this SAC. In addition to the below instructions, the form to be used for documentation of quality assurance surveillance is the SAC provided as Enclosure (3) herein.

7. Identified QA Surveillance Tasks

Enclosures (1) and (2) set forth the performance standards and incentives for the Contractor and COR while

Enclosure (3) provides the checklist and means for the COR to document the results of the surveillance.

8. Documentation

In addition to providing annual reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR shall 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 original copies of the SACs.

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 and all task orders.

9. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) – Data Reporting Standards

Enclosure (2) – Incentives

Enclosure (3) –Surveillance Activity Checklist - Quarterly/Annual

Enclosure (1)

DATA REPORTING STANDARDS

Description

Performance Standard and

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Surveillance

Method / Measure Incentives

Sustainment Engineering, Training and Tools Services, SOW paragraphs

3.2.1 through 3.2.8. Refer to SOW for applicable CDRLs.

Requirements and objectives met on time and within budget 95% of the time.

Surveillance by COR and/or subject matter expert feedback.

See Enclosure 2.

Technical Reports / Submission is in accordance with the DID cited in the

CDRLs. Refer to SOW for applicable

CDRLs.

95% acceptable on first submission to Government;

100% acceptable on the second submission to

Government

Surveillance by COR and/or subject matter expert feedback.

See Enclosure 2.

Status Reports – Technical and Cost /

Submission is in accordance with the

DID cited in the CDRLs. Refer to

SOW paragraphs 3.2.9and 3.2.10.

95% acceptable on first submission to Government;

100% acceptable on the second submission to

Government

Surveillance by COR and/or subject matter expert feedback.

See Enclosure 2.

Operations Security (OPSEC) Plan /

Submission in accordance with the

DID cited in the CDRLs. Refer to

SOW paragraph 5.2.

95% acceptable on first submission to Government;

100% acceptable on the second submission to

Government

Surveillance by COR and/or subject matter expert feedback.

See Enclosure 2.

For Official Use Only

Source Selection Information. See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Enclosure (2)

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this contract:

Assessment Period

Acceptable

Performance

Definition

How Measured Incentives

Evaluation Period 1

All measurement areas rated

“Satisfactory” or above. See

Enclosure (3).

Annual assessment period (12 th month) evaluation using the quarterly surveillance checklists and the

CPARs format covering the previous

12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders. Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders.* Receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

Evaluation Period 2 All measurement areas rated

“Satisfactory” or above. See

Enclosure (3).

Annual assessment period (24 th month) evaluation using the quarterly surveillance checklists and the

CPARs format covering the previous

12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders. Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders.* Receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

Evaluation Period 3 All measurement areas rated

“Satisfactory” or above. See

Enclosure (3).

Annual assessment period (36 th month) evaluation using the quarterly surveillance checklists and the

CPARs format covering the previous

12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders. Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders.* Receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

Evaluation Period 4 All measurement areas rated at least

“Satisfactory”.

Three or more measurement areas rated either

“Very Good” or

“Exceptional”.

See Enclosure (3).

Annual assessment period (48 th month) evaluation using the quarterly surveillance checklists and the

CPARs format covering the previous

12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders. Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders.* Receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

Evaluation Period 5 All measurement areas rated at least

“Satisfactory”.

Three or more measurement areas rated either

“Very Good” or

“Exceptional”.

See Enclosure (3).

Annual assessment period (60 th month) evaluation using the quarterly surveillance checklists and the

CPARs format covering the previous

12 months.

(+) Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders. Receives a positive assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for award of future task orders.* Receives a negative assessment (CPAR), appropriate for the quality of service provided.

* The Government may not award future task orders unless all regulatory requirements are met and the Contractor meets the acceptable performance definition.

Enclosure (3)

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

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 planning and management of program tasks, the quality of support provided throughout all phases of task order 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. Include, as applicable, a discussion of the accuracy of reports/data; and the degree of

Government technical direction required to solve problems that arise during performance. 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 task order costs. Include, as applicable, a discussion of the Contractor’s ability to perform within the total estimated cost (what is the relationship of the negotiated costs and budgeted costs to actuals); innovative approaches implemented by the Contractor that resulted in cost savings; the timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of invoices; and the adequacy of the Contractor’s budgetary internal controls.

Management Responsiveness – 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. 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. Discuss the extent to which the Contractor discharges its responsibility for integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract and task orders, identifies and applies resources required to meet schedule requirements, assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required the by the task orders, and 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.

The evaluation ratings for all areas are as follows:

Exceptional - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task/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/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/sub-task contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Source Selection Information. See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task/sub-task being assessed reflects 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/sub-task contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s actions appear or were ineffective.

Quarterly 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 Management Responsiveness

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 ____

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST - QUARTERLY

Quarterly Surveillance:

The COR will perform a quarterly assessment of Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, and Management

Responsiveness utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (2). The assessments will be performed and reported for each active task order by the applicable Technical Points of Contact

(TPOC) for that task order.

If a rating description or a rating category are not applicable during a given evaluation period, then a grade of

“n/a” should be recorded.

Surveillance

Method /

Measure

Date

Planned

Date

Completed Quality Schedule

Cost

Control

Mgmt

Response

Sustainment

Engineering, Training and Tools

Services, SOW paragraphs 3.2.1 through 3.2.8. Refer to SOW for applicable CDRLs.

Surveillance by

COR and/or subject matter expert feedback.

TBD

Technical Reports /

Submission is in accordance with the

DID cited in the

CDRLs. Refer to

SOW for applicable

CDRLs.

Surveillance by

COR and/or subject matter expert feedback. TBD

Status Reports –

Technical and Cost /

Submission is in accordance with the

DID cited in the

CDRLs. Refer to

SOW paragraphs

3.2.9 and 3.2.10.

Surveillance by

COR and/or subject matter expert feedback.

TBD

Operations Security

(OPSEC) Plan /

Submission in accordance with the

DID cited in the

CDRLs. Refer to

SOW paragraph 5.2.

Surveillance by

COR and/or subject matter expert feedback. TBD

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST - ANNUAL

Annual Surveillance:

The COR will perform an annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (2) and the quarterly SAC summary of ratings.

Surveillance Method /

Measure Date Planned

Date

Completed

Summary

Rating / Results

Quality Review of Quarterly Ratings TBD

Schedule Review of Quarterly Ratings TBD

Cost Control Review of Quarterly Ratings TBD

Management Review of Quarterly Ratings TBD