_Attachment_5_QASP.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND REGULATION

MONITORING CONTRACT

Revision 0

Prepared by the Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center

Port Hueneme, CA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

4.2 Customer Feedback

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

5.2 Monitoring Forms

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.2 Reporting

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

7 APPROVALS

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled State Environmental Legislative and Regulatory Monitoring. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines that the Naval Facilities Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center (NAVFAC EXWC) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

2.1.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by NAVFAC EXWC to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

2.1.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints.

The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

Performance Management Strategy

2.2.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS.

This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

2.2.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time COR as the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.

The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The COR is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract.

4 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in Attachment 1, “Performance Requirements Summary.” If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract. Failure to meet the required service or performance level will result in a deduction from the monthly amount.

5 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance are as follows:

Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR designated inspector.

Unsolicited customer feedback, which is received by the COR

Periodic Inspection –COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a quarterly basis.

Customer Feedback

The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the CO or COR, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint Investigation, identified in Attachment 3.

Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

Acceptable Quality Levels

The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary Table, for contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

6 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes.

Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1.

Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments 2 and 3. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved.

6.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

7 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

Determining Performance

7.1.1 Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.

Reporting

7.2.1 At the end of each month, COR will prepare a written report for the Government Project Manager (PM) summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance.

This written report, which includes the contractor’s submitted reports and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2) will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

Reviews and Resolution

7.3.1 The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the PM and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the COR or PM as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

Issues and concerns of both parties

Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

7.3.2 The COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

7.3.3 The COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action.

Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented.

Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the Contracting Officer.

8 APPROVALS

Name and Title Date Signature

Casey Barker Project COR

Marian Basa Contract Specialist

Nicole Mendes

Contracting Officer

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Performance objective

Performance standard

Acceptable quality level

Monitoring method

Incentive

Task 1A – (Regulatory and Legislative Monitoring)

Timeliness – initiation of service

The ability to initiate performance and provide customers with login / passwords and access to initial training within two weeks of contract award is expected.

Note timeliness of service initiation.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Tasks 1A and 1B Website Performance

Website performance (speed) for page loading, execution of queries, and downloading of results in HTML, EXCEL formats must be reasonably fast.

(For example, to be considered acceptable, your site should support the generation and download of a 1megabyte Excel file in 30 seconds or less on average).

Website availability – should be continuous except for scheduled after hours maintenance.

Spot check and absence of negative feedback.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Task 1A (and 3) Monitoring and Reporting

E-mail alerts – ease of handling based formatting.

E-mail alerts are formatted or provided with attachments such as MS Word that can pass through DOD security screening systems; as these systems reformat e-mails to plain text, and remove some formats of attachments such as HTML that might contain code.

Spot check; ability to receive and use product. Absence of negative customer feedback.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Task 1A (and 3) Assisted Monitoring and Tracking

Capture of relevant information

No more than five significant legislative and ten significant regulatory items should be missed annually. The regulatory number applies only to actual regulatory proposals, not to guidance documents, or activities of environmental committees, boards, and commissions.

Absence of negative customer feedback concerning omissions.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal

The goal is to miss no “significant” items. Significant items are those that can tangibly affect client operations, either positively or negatively. In the case of bills or regulatory items specifically identified by DOD for tracking, the standard is not missing any opportunity to report significant changes or development on the item.

Task 1A (and 3) Monitoring and Reporting

Avoidance of reporting irrelevant information.

Our desire is that the Contractor screen wide, to capture all potentially relevant information, but not too much irrelevant information.

No more than 35% of the items reported should be initially in the category of irrelevant items.

Following feedback from DOD clients, this percentage should decline to 20 percent or less.

Periodic spot check.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Task 1A (and 3) Monitoring and Reporting

Responsiveness to feedback about relevant and irrelevant information

Once DOD clients have collectively confirmed that a reporting category is not relevant, the category should not reappear in reported materials.

Periodic spot check.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Task 1A (and 3) Monitoring and Reporting

Timeliness of notification of newly proposed bills and regulations.

Newly posted information on state websites that is relevant to the monitoring effort should be promptly conveyed to DOD:

Within one day for legislative information.

Within three days for regulatory information.

Note timeliness of notification.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Task 1B (and 3) Monitoring and Reporting

Timeliness of routine service

Reports are to be provided weekly for the MS-word version and weekly for the MS Access version and shall contain information that is current to within one (1) day of the report date.

Note timeliness of report delivery.

Absence of negative customer feedback.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards

Government.

Task 2 – (Follow-up Assistance)

Availability Contractor will be available during normal business hours to accept telephone inquiries.

Reaching voice mail does not constitute availability unless the call can be promptly returned or forwarded to a mobile phone or other personal device.

Absence of negative customer feedback.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal

Task 2 –

Responsiveness Contractor will respond within 24 hours within the normal work week, and in normal cases complete the gathering of available information within 48 hours. Where a complete response requires input from other personnel such as state regulators

– as soon as possible but no specific time limit.

Absence of negative customer feedback.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards within the Federal Government.

Task 2 - Usefulness, Accuracy

Information provided should be accurate (regulatory) and insightful (legislative).

Absence of negative customer feedback.

CPARS Review:

Past performance information can affect decisions to exercise options or make future contract awards

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________

ATTACHMENT 3: CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

Contract Number: N39430-XX-X-

XXXX

Date/Time Received:

Received By:

Source of Complaint:

Organization:

Phone Number:

Location:

Details of Complaint:

Comments:

Complaint Validation: □ Valid □ Non-Valid

Project Manager (Signature)______________________________ Date: __________

Contractor's (Signature)______________________________ Date: __________

Rework: □ Acceptable □ Unacceptable □ Not Applicable