Attachment_3_QASP.pdf

N00421-18-R-0009

Attachment 3

20 March 2019

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

For High Endurance Electronic Warfare Jet (HEEWJ) Capabilities Services

1. Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is a government developed and applied document used to determine if the contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. This QASP establishes procedures on how to conduct assessments/inspections and provides a detailed process for continuous oversight.

The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract requirements. This QASP provides the structure for the government surveillance of the contractor’s performance to ensure High Endurance Electronic Warfare Jet HEEWJ contract standards are consistently achieved.

The contract required, in support of the Contracted Air Services (CAS) Program Office (PMA-

226), is to acquire the services of Contractor Owned Contractor Operated (COCO) HEEWJ aircraft to train shipboard and aircraft squadrons how to counter threats in the Electronic Warfare

(EW) environment.

The resultant contract is anticipated to be a performance-based Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract.

This contract will have one, four-year 364-day ordering period. A properly executed and administered QASP will ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

This QASP is a living document. Flexibility is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.

2. Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Section E, (Part 46 of the Federal

Acquisition Regulation for Inspection of Services clauses) which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order to be executed by the contracting officer or a duly authorized representative.

3. Scope

To understand fully the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between the QASP and the contractors Quality system/manual. 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 in accordance with the CFR Title

14, Aeronautics and Space (14 CFR)

The QASP on the other hand, is in place to provide Government surveillance and oversight of the

Contractor's efforts to assure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering the results specified in the contract.

4. Roles and Responsibilities

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

20 March 2019

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the

COR, ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide

Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the government’s behalf. The Integrated Product Team Lead (IPTL) CAS Deputy Program Manager (DPM) executes the program as the PM’s primary representative. The PM for this contract is PMA-226.

Assigned PM: CAPT Andrew Lynch, PMA226

Telephone: 252-466-3660

Email: andrew.lynch@navy.mil

Principle Deputy PM: Andy Wilkinson

Telephone: 252-466-6436

Email: edward.a.wilkinson@navy.mil

IPTL (CAS DPM): Brian Alexander

Telephone: 252-466-5368

Email: brian.t.alexander@navy.mil

Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) – The PCO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The PCO is duly appointed with the authority to enter into or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)) contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. The ACO will be designated in the resulting contract award. The PCO is designated via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority. The PCO determines the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned PCO: Michael Coon

Organization or Agency: AIR 2.5.1.13

Telephone: 301-757-7114

Email: michael.coon@navy.mil

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the PCO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the PCO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor's performance.

Government Flight Representative (GFR) – the GFR is a US Military officer or similarly qualified civilian with the responsibility for oversight of public aircraft operations conducted by commercial Contractors.

20 March 2019

Other Key Government Personnel (May add GFR & SO)

This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts, or others who provide information that helps the COR monitor contractor performance.

Contractor Representatives

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task

Manager for this contract. (To be completed after the contract award)

Program Manager - (TBD)

Telephone: (TBD)

Email: (TBD)

Task Manager – (TBD)

Contract Representative (CR): (TBD)

5. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance

5.1. Contract Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the contractor’s performance.

Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the government, is responsible for management and QC/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.

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 QA surveillance is the Surveillance Activity Checklist provided as Enclosure

(4) herein.

Enclosure (1) sets forth the HEEWJ Services Mission Performance Standards and Enclosure (2) provides the CDRL Data Performance Standards, Corrective Action Reporting, Enclosure (3) shall be used for the Contractor and COR for documenting all corrective actions. Enclosure (4) provides the Surveillance Activity Checklist, a 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.

5.2. Performance Standards

The Services Mission Performance Standards, Enclosure 1, is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

20 March 2019

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance.

The Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The Performance

Requirement Summary (PRS) should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist.

5.3. Contractor Performance Rating Definitions

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Performance

Rating

Criteria

Excellent /

Outstanding

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the government’s benefits. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated 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 benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated 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 element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

6. Performance Reporting

6.1. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)

CPARS reports will impact the determination to issue task orders under this contract and will impact the contractor's ability to compete on future DoD contracts. 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 annually. This evaluation will be one determinant in the continuation of issuing task orders under this contract. The

Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, management, and other 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.

6.2. Corrective Action Report (CAR)

The CAR, Enclosure (3) is a surveillance and communication tool that provides a format for the

Contractor to detail the corrective action of a cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence.

7. Documentation

In addition to providing quarterly reports 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 contract. The COR shall forward these records to the

Contracting Officer at termination or completion of each task order.

8. Enclosures

Enclosure (1) –HEEWJ Services Mission Performance Standards

Enclosure (2) –CDRL Data Performance Standards

Enclosure (3) –Corrective Action Report

Enclosure (4) – HEEWJ Surveillance Activity Checklist 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 the CPARS cycle...then divide that number by total number of days in the CPARS cycle to derive percentage (360/365 =

98.6%).

4.2.5, 4.2.5.1, 4.2.5.2, 10.1.4

Fuel Accountability

Compliance:

Provide Fuel Chits, which track all fuel consumption and provide fuel receipts, flight logs, and Fuel

Reports to the

Government

Metric 4

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

98% 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, and flight log information.

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.

Monthly

20 March 2019

GFP

9.3 CDRL A007

Develop, implement, and maintain an OPSEC program

IAW PWS

Submission is in accordance with DI-MGMT-81999, cited in the CDRL A008

National Security Decision

Directive 298

98% of required deliverables provided on time and with no more than one report per year may be inaccurate or require a re-write

100% Inspection by

COR and/or technical points of contacts as indicated on CDRL

As delivered per the

DD Form 1423.

20 March 2019

Enclosure 3: CAR

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MAJOR MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

Enclosure 4: Monthly Surveillance Format Used:

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

Responsiveness, Utilization of Small Business, and Other Areas as applicable utilizing the

CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (2).

Description Surveillance

Method/Measure

Date

Planned

Date Completed Quality

Metric =

Schedule

Metric =

Cost

Control Metric =

CPARS

Mgmt.

Metric

= CPARS

Utilization of

Small Business (yes/no)

Other

Areas

As described above in

Enclosure 1

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback

TBD

100% Inspection by COR and customer feedback