Task Order Attachment 3 - QASP.doc

FOSR #: N00421-20-R-0105 TO-0001

Attachment 3

FOSR #: N00421-20-R-0105 TO-0001

Attachment 3

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for United States Marine Corps (USMC)

F/A-18 Maintenance Augmentation Support 1.

Purpose

This QASP is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure the systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics and the Government receives the quality of services identified in the task order.

Specifically, the task order requirement is to provide Aircraft Maintenance Services (AMS) to perform organizational level (O-Level) inspection and maintenance on the F/A- 18 aircraft of Marine Aircraft Group-31 (MAG-31) and on other aircraft as assigned to Marine Aviation Logistics Squadrons-31 (MALS-31).

The requirement will be awarded under the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Kits, Recovery, Augmentation, Components and Engines (KRACEn) Multiple Award Contract (MAC) as a performance based task order with firm-fixed-price (FFP) labor CLINs. The order will be for one (1) base year and two (2) 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 Section E – Inspection and Acceptance of the task order, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in the task order, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3.

Scope

The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the quality of the Contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the task 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-XXXX (To be completed at task order award). 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.

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.

6.

Methods of QA Surveillance a.

Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – The market place for engineering and management support services is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS rating under this contract. For this procurement the Government will annually assess the quality of products and services, schedule, cost control, and management 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.

b.

QASP – The below listed methods of surveillance will be used by the COR in the technical administration of the PWS tasks performed by the contractor.

7. Surveillance

Enclosures (1), (2), (3), and (4) set forth the performance standards, data reporting standards, incentives, and definitions while enclosure (5) provides the checklists and means for the COR to document the results of the surveillance and shall be provided to the Contracting Officer on a quarterly basis. As listed in Enclosure (1), customer feedback may also be used as a surveillance measure.

8. Documentation

In addition to providing an annual report 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 Surveillance 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) – Performance Based Standards

Enclosure (2) – Data Reporting Standards

Enclosure (3) – Incentives Enclosure (4) – Definitions for Evaluation Areas/Ratings Enclosure (5) – Surveillance Checklists

PERFORMANCE BASED STANDARDS

Perform F/A-18 O-Level maintenance tasks, PWS para 5.1.1

Maintain Required Staffing Levels, PWS para 5.1.2

Maintain Qualified Personnel, PWS para 5.2

DATA REPORTING STANDARDS

INCENTIVES

If any of the performance requirements do not meet the AQL, the COR shall document the discrepancy(s) and shall notify the Contractor and Contracting Officer on a monthly basis (or sooner if necessary), for appropriate action.

When the performance is below the AQL standard, the Government may implement negative incentives that include: increased surveillance, reduction in contract price, decision not to exercise next option, increased Contractor reporting, and/or documentation of contractor’s failure to meet performance requirements in the Contractor’s Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

Due to the urgent and continuous nature of this requirement, the government requires the contractor to maintain the proposed workforce at 100% manning. As such, the contractor is expected to develop a manning plan to fill any planned or unplanned vacancies on an expedited basis. Any vacancies that occur in the contractor’s proposed manning should be filled within 14 calendar days. Any manning vacancies that remain unfilled after 14 days will have an invoice offset calculated using the total proposed daily cost (including profit and overhead) for the position left vacant (based on a 30 day month) times the number of vacant days in the billing cycle plus an additional 10% of the cost calculated.

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

DEFINITIONS FOR EVALUATION AREAS/RATINGS

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

Quality of Product or Service – Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards). Include, as applicable, a discussion of the accuracy of reports/data; the extent to which the products/services provided meet the specifications of the contract; the extent to which the contractor’s work measures up to commonly accepted technical or professional standards; and the degree of Government technical direction required to solve problems that arise during performance.

Schedule – Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules and administrative requirements. This assessment of the contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule should include the contractor’s efforts during the assessment period that contribute to or affect the schedule variance. This element applies to contract closeout activities as well as contract performance.

Cost Control – Assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. 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 - Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract; including customer satisfaction, subcontractor management, overall contract management, timeliness, completeness and quality of corrective action plans, staffing, and overall effective business relations. Assess the contractor’s ability relative to risk management and contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting and replacing key personnel.

The evaluation ratings for all areas identified above 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.

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 some 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.

SURVEILLANCE CHECKLISTS

Quarterly Surveillance:

The COR will perform a quarterly assessment of Quality, Schedule, Cost Control and Management as applicable utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (4).

Maintain 100% workforce staffing, PWS para 5.1.2

Surveillance by COR

Quarterly Summary of Ratings

Quality

Schedule

Number of Exceptional

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Marginal

Number of Unsatisfactory

Cost Control

Management

Number of Unsatisfactory

Annual Surveillance:

The COR will perform an annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (4) and the Quarterly Summary of Ratings.

For Official Use Only

Source Selection Sensitive. See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

For Official Use Only