LMR Program QASP_July 2024.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the

LIVING MARINE RESOURCES PROGRAM

July 2024

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

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines that NAVFAC EXWC will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of this contract. The intent is to ensure that the Contractors perform in accordance with performance metrics set forth in the contract documents, that the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract and that the Government only pays for the acceptable level of services received.

1.1.2 The QASP is intended to be a “living document.” That is, it may be revised or modified as circumstances warrant throughout the contract period.

1.1.3 The contractors, and not the Government, are responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. The role of the Government is quality assurance to ensure contract standards are achieved.

1.1.4 Contractor performance will be assessed by the COR on a continuing basis by review of deliverables, technical meetings, random sampling of Contractor performance, review of the Contractors’ Quality Control Plan, documentations, and general day-to-day interaction with Contractor personnel.

Informal contract management performance reviews will be conducted quarterly.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 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 Statement of Objectives (SOO) and the contractor’s proposal 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.

1.2.2 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.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control program (QCP). 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’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the Statement of Objectives and the Contractor’s proposal. 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 QCP.

1.3.2 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.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 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.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The contracting officer’s representative (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 work 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.

3 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 invoiced amount. Failure to meet the required service or performance level will result in a deduction from the invoiced amount.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 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 (include those that apply)

Random Inspection, which shall be performed by the COR designated inspector as needed.

Contractor Submitted Report – COR typically performs a quarterly inspection of contractor submitted quarterly reports via a COR quarterly status report (QSR).

100% /Final Inspection – COR performs a 100% inspection of all deliverables at contract or task order completion.

4.2 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 COTR/COR. The COTR/COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate.

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

4.3 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.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

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

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

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) website. The online 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 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

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.

6.2 Reporting

At the end of each quarter, the COR will prepare a COR Status Report within the Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module, summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR status report includes relevant information from the contractor’s submitted quarterly report and 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.

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

6.3.1 The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the COR 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 as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Quarterly performance assessment data and trend analysis

Issues and concerns of both parties

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

Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

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

6.3.3 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 PCO/ACO.

7 APPROVALS

Name and Title Date Signature

Mandy Shoemaker

COR

2 July 2024

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Required Services Performance Standards Acceptable Quality Levels

Methods of Surveillance

Incentive (Positive and/or Negative)

Work Product Quality / Accuracy

(i) The overall quality of the Contractors’ deliverable work products; (ii) the extent and accuracy of any documentation, references, and background material accompanying a finished deliverable product; and (iii) the appropriateness of the format and clarity of written products and presentations, considering the intended audience for the deliverable product.

95% of tasks completed on time with zero changes required.

Contract requirements met with few minor and no significant problems encountered. Performance meets all technical and functional requirements in the SOO and contains pertinent, useful, and informative data and information.

Customer feedback, review of contractor products, and contractor furnished quarterly reports.

Exercise of Options (if applicable), positive CPARS rating/Failure to fund future work, Negative CPARS Rating

Contract Management / Administration

The Contractors’ effective management of its staff, subcontractors, and vendors. Management oversight of technical efforts required to meet contract requirements.

Particularly to be considered are: (i) establishment of internal mechanisms to assure proper supervision of work force (including subcontractor), (ii) access to and responsiveness of key personnel to the Government, especially the communication, coordination and cooperation to dependably resolve problems that may arise in communication, planning, scheduling or other related areas;

(iii) efficient completion of assigned tasks and overall effective use of available resources, and (iv) quality of the business relationships with the Government organizations and with all of its subcontractors and vendors.

95% Customer Satisfaction.

Contractor demonstrates control of staff and subcontractors. Key personnel are available and responsive to Government needs. Cost over-runs or change orders mitigated. Business relationships are professional, cordial, and effective.

Customer feedback, direct observation of performance and contractor furnished quarterly reports.

Exercise of Options (if applicable), positive CPARS rating/Failure to fund future work, Negative CPARS Rating

Reports/ Presentations

Timeliness and quality of reports/presentations whether monthly, annual, or ad hoc. Reports/presentations submitted must be accurate, easily readable, and responsive to the needs of the Government client. Reports/presentations allow Government to assess implications and trends for planning, policy development, and budget planning.

95% Customer Satisfaction Contract requirements met by submitting reports on time, in the proper format, without the need for Government Quality Assurance.

Government review of reports, and contractor furnished quarterly reports.

Exercise of Options (if applicable), positive CPARS rating/Failure to fund future work, Negative CPARS Rating