SECTION_J_Att_E_-_QASP.docx
DOCX document 17 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Explosion Effects, Risk Assessment, and Protective Construction Support for Explosives Safety.
- Solicitation number
- N3943018R2031
About this file
SECTION_J_Att_E_-_QASP.docx
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SECTION_J_Att_C_-_Sched_of_FFP_rates_revised2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| N3943018R2031_AMD_0003.pdf | ||
| N3943018R2031_AMD_0002.pdf | ||
| SECTION_J_Att_C_-_Sched_of_FFP_rates_revised.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| N3943018R2031_AMD_0001.pdf | ||
| SECTION_J_Att_D_-_RFI_Form.doc | DOC document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Quality Assessment Surveillance Plan (QASP)
1. Purpose
This Quality Assessment Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a structure for evaluation of contractor performance on the Explosion Effects, Risk Assessment, and Protective Construction Support for Explosives Safety contract. This QASP is a living document and may be modified without modifying the contract. A copy of this QASP will be provided to the contractor.
2. Roles and Responsibilities
The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will evaluate contractor performance. In the event of unsatisfactory outcomes or performance, the COR will notify the Contracting Officer and Contractor.
3. Assessment Frequency and Methodology Assessment, Criteria, and Approach
Table 1 – Performance Assessment Form below lists contract objectives, tasks, performance expectations, and evaluation criteria and may be used for recording ratings and notes. The COR is responsible for all evaluation. All metrics are qualitative (not numeric). Incentives consist of feedback (praise or constructive criticism), and the CPARS evaluation. At least every three months, the COR will compare contractor performance with the expectations and document to file the contractor’s performance in each table category. Unless unsatisfactory performance is noted, no action needs be taken until the annual CPARS evaluation.
CPARS Reporting
This contract meets the mandatory evaluation dollar threshold and will be evaluated at least annually using the web based Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). No separate report will be prepared; however, in the event of unsatisfactory performance, notification will be given as soon as the unsatisfactory performance is noted.
Table 1 – Performance Assessment Form
| Primary Task |
| Sub-Tasks |
| Standard |
| Acceptable Quality |
Level Assessment Level
| How it will be inspected |
| Performance Rating: (Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Poor, Unsatisfactory) |
| Risk Assessment Program Support |
| Risk-based analyses and development of explosives safety guidance |
| Analyses are technically competent and explosives safety guidance is well thought out and rationale |
| Risk-based analyses pass peer review and explosives safety guidance is considered |
| COR shall review submittal upon receipt of documentation |
| Documentation shall be assessed for technical validity, compliance with accepted practices, and clarity |
| Preparation of technical documents and development of briefings |
| Documents are technically accurate and clearly convey message and/or concepts |
| Technical documents pass peer review and briefings convey message |
| COR shall review submittal upon receipt of documentation |
| Documentation shall be assessed for technical validity, compliance with accepted practices, and clarity |
| DDESB Science Panel Support |
| Development of blast effects & consequence models |
| Proposed models are technically valid and represent the state-of-the-art |
| Proposed models pass peer review |
| COR shall review submittal upon receipt of documentation |
| Documentation shall be assessed for technical validity, compliance with accepted practices, and clarity |
| Testing support (development of test plans, execution, data analysis, etc) |
| Support is conducive to successful conduct of test and production of testing report and associated analyses |
| Testing support was conducive to a successful test environment |
| COR shall review submittal upon receipt of documentation and test summary |
| Documentation shall be assessed for technical validity, compliance with accepted practices, and clarity |
| DoD Protective Construction Support |
| Conduct design and analysis per UFC 3-340-02 or other applicable criteria |
| Engineering analysis is technically correct and in accordance with regulatory criteria |
| Analysis and calculations pass technical review |
| COR shall review submittal upon receipt of documentation |
| Documentation shall be assessed for technical validity, compliance with accepted practices, and clarity |
| Reduced QD assessment and structural analysis |
| Analyses are technically competent and explosives safety assessment is analytically supported |
| Technical analysis and assessment passes engineering review |
| COR shall review submittal upon receipt of documentation and test summary |
| Documentation shall be assessed for technical validity, compliance with accepted practices, and clarity |
File details come from the government source that posted it.