J-1 QASP.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE

SURVEILLANCE PLAN

HUSBANDING SERVICES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of any Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to provide a structured process for managing contract performance and reducing performance risk. It emphasizes communication during all phases of contract performance. The Fleets will use a matrixed approach to conduct port visit surveillance, including on site COR surveillance when the COR is present for the port visit or ship supply officer surveillance conveyed to the COR through ship's Port Visit Checklist (PVCL), Daily Reconciliation, and other Government observations. Additionally, some aspects of performance will require contributions from the contracting office relative to small business subcontract compliance or similar matters.

The QASP process facilitates sharing performance information between the Government and the contractor and will provide support for future source selections.

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance-based Performance Work Statement (PWS). This performance-based requirement sets forth the procedures and guidelines the NAVSUP Fleet Logistics Centers, and their detachments will use to monitor Husbanding Service Provider (HSP) performance, to evaluate port visit cost reporting, and to document overall Government satisfaction with HSP performance.

1.1 PURPOSE

1.1.1 This QASP describes the systematic methods used to measure HSP performance. The

QASP additionally provides the Government a means for evaluating whether the HSP is complying with the terms and conditions of the contract.

1.1.2 This QASP defines roles and responsibilities, identifies the performance objectives, and defines methodologies used to monitor and evaluate HSP performance and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.1.3 Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under FAR 52.246-2 Inspection of Supplies Fixed Price and FAR 52.246-4 Inspection of Services-Fixed Price, which provide for inspections and acceptance of the services, and documentation called for in the contract to be accomplished by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) or their duly authorized representative. The Government shall perform inspections and tests in a manner that will not delay contractor performance.

2.0 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

2.1 The performance-based PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service is required as opposed to “how” the HSP should perform the work. This QASP defines the performance management approach taken by the PCO to monitor, manage, and take appropriate action on the HSP’s performance against expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS. Performance management rests upon developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance metrics. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management. Data generated in a performance management approach provides information that indicates whether or not expected outcomes for required services are being achieved adequately by the HSP.

2.2 Performance management focuses on assessing whether or not outcomes are being achieved.

Process reviews required by law and compelling business situations such as safety and health may be used on a case by case basis. An outcome focus provides the HSP flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes required are being achieved at the desired levels of performance.

3.0 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

3.1 The HSP develops and utilizes staffing and procedures for use on a continuous basis, for self-inspecting quality, schedule, management, regulatory compliance, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements of the PWS.

3.2 The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) and the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will monitor performance, review performance reports, and other documentation to determine how the HSP is performing against communicated performance objectives. The Government will make decisions based on performance measurement metric data and notify the HSP of those decisions.

The HSP is responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

3.3 To monitor performance, the COR will utilize QASP Surveillance Matrix (Attachment 1) performance standards and methods of surveillance, and Evaluation Rating Definitions (Enclosure

1) to assign appropriate ratings. When the COR is not present during the port visit, the ship supply officer will use the following guidelines to provide port visit surveillance and ensure HSP compliance with the PWS:

3.3.1 Follow all HSP responsibilities outlined in OPNAVINST 4400.11 (series) Ready

Reference Guide, NAVSUPINST 4205.3 (series), NAVSUP P-485, and the PVCL (Attachment 2).

3.3.2 Conduct random inspections on services provided by HSP, and document these inspections on the PVCL and/or daily reconciliation

3.3.3 Document contractor performance on the PVCL and Daily Reconciliation utilizing QASP Surveillance Matrix performance standards, and provide completed documents to the

COR.

3.4 The COR or COR Program Manager will complete a Quality Assurance (QA) report for each port visit in HSPortal via the port visit QA tab. The QA report is completed using surveillance information the COR gathered during the port visit and/or ship PVCL, Daily Reconciliation, and other communicated Government observations. A QA Performance report capturing all port visits within each quarter shall be provided to the contractor within 45 days after the end of each quarter (January-March; April-June; July-September and October-December). The PCO will provide QA Performance Report to the contractor via email. Briefings regarding HSP performance via teleconference or face-to-face meeting can be arranged on a case by case basis as required either by the PCO or HSP contractor.

3.5 Annually, or as required, the Government will input performance evaluations into the Department of Defense (DoD) Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). HSP contractors are required to obtain CPARS accounts for electronic distribution of assessments.

CPARS accounts can be established at https://cpars.gov.

4.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1 Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO): The PCO ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the contract terms, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The PCO assures that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The PCO is ultimately responsible for determining the adequacy of the contractor’s performance. The PCO will consider the following when determining the adequacy of the contractor’s performance: DD250; PVCL; and/or supplemental information received from COR, Numbered Fleets, and Ships. The PCO is the individual who performs pre-award functions, awards a contract, and performs post-award contract actions.

PCO functions include:

• All pre-award, contract award, and post-award contractual actions.

• Monitors, assesses, and communicates HSP performance.

• Review’s COR’s HSP performance reports (CPARS report, QASP,) and approves them.

4.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR): Government customer representative, assigned by the PCO, performs quality assurance functions for contracted services. The COR provides continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall maintain a Quality Assurance file in HSPortal that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. 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.

COR functions include:

• Assists in acquisition planning and contract award processing

• Provides technical assistance to the PCO.

• Maintains proficiency in contract surveillance procedures.

• Performs surveillance in accordance with the surveillance plan and provides PCO documentation of surveillance observations.

• Notifies PCO of any significant performance deficiencies.

• Monitors, assesses and communicates HSP performance, to the PCO, which will be used in documenting HSP’s past performance.

• COR will collect all relevant documentation, to include PVCLs, After Action Lessons

Learned messages, relevant e-mails and documented phone conversations, HSP invoices submitted in WAWF. Commanding Officers will verify the legitimacy of the inputs received via ships and other sources and input the QA Report into the HS Portal.

• COR will upload documentation, applicable to QA Report, into the HS Portal. For Classified documents that cannot be uploaded, CORs will reference message DTGs or e-mails and enter pertinent comments into the HSPortal QA Tab comments section.

• CORs will review ship provided Port Visit Check List and provide any reasons for non-concurrence.

• For urgent concerns discovered during port visit execution or during the QA Report process, where timeliness of HSP performance concerns need to be processed quickly, COR shall notify PCO of any significant performance deficiencies as soon as possible and not wait for all documentation to be collected.

5.0 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES AND METHOD OF SURVEILLENCE

The HSP shall provide husbanding service support pursuant to the PWS. While the HSP is fully expected to comply with all requirements in the PWS, the government’s assessment of HSP performance will primarily focus on the performance objectives below. The level of acceptance for each objective is established IAW CPARS evaluation criteria listed for Quality, Schedule, Management, Regulatory Compliance, Utilization of Small Business and Cost Control, Numeric grades to be assigned for each area range from 1 to 5. As noted in paragraph 7.1 below, an overall numeric goal of 3 is targeted for each performance objective.

Ratings of 4 or 5 may be assigned if the contractor performed single or multiple significant events which were of benefit to the Government and there were NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than 3 solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract / order.

5.1 Performance Objective #1: Quality:

Quality of services or supplies provided shall conform at least to the quality standards contained in the PWS. All services shall be performed by individuals fully qualified and licensed in their relevant area(s). Specific areas of focus for quality are listed below:

Specific Performance Objective examples from the PWS include, but are not limited to:

5.1.1 Quality of Personnel: All HSP management personnel who deal directly with the ship must speak and understand conversational English and be able to discuss technical aspects of shipboard requirements and services available in the port. All correspondence shall be in English. Personnel providing force protection services must be responsive to instructions from the ship. This does not authorize force protection personnel to violate any local regulations, any Port Authority ordinances, or local decrees. Transportation operators (vehicles and water taxi operators) must be fully qualified and in possession of valid driving / operating licenses. Operators shall be familiar with local area and conversant in English.

5.1.2 Quality of Ordered Services: The HSP shall brief the ship’s Supply Officer about ordered services upon arrival. This briefing shall include what was ordered and scheduled times and dates for delivery. The HSP is responsible for providing timely delivery and performance of the supplies and services ordered.

5.1.3 Quality of Measurements: Any services requiring volume metrics, meter readings, or other forms of measurement, including potable or other water delivered to the ship, CHT and Oily Waste removal services will be documented on the receipt document that clearly documents the verifiable/calculative proof of actual quantities of services rendered by HSP or the HSP’s sub- contractor, or authorized vendors.

5.1.4 Quality of Communication Services: HSP shall provide cellular phones that are activated, functioning, and have proper chargers, transformers, and additional batteries.

Additionally, the HSP shall provide SIM and Top-Up cards with the number of minutes requested in the task order.

5.1.5 Support Equipment:

5.1.5.1 Brows, platforms, shore power cables, mooring lines, fenders, curb caps and steps: HSP shall deliver safe and functional equipment IAW PWS requirements allowing for safe mooring / sustainment of the ship pierside and safe traversal for ship’s crew to and from the pier.

5.1.5.2 Barges & camels: Breasting, fendering, landing, oily waste barges, camels and paint floats shall be properly sized for the ship being serviced and properly fendered to prevent damage to the vessel or the barge itself.

5.1.5.3 Force Protection: Equipment and material used for the force protection services shall be inspected by the Ship’s Force to ascertain meeting force protection requirements.

5.1.5.4 Mobile Cranes: HSP shall provide mobile crane services (shore and floating cranes) with operator(s) and safety observer(s). The cranes provided shall be in sound mechanical condition and shall meet all applicable safety laws and regulations (DOD laws and country where services are being provided). The cranes shall be suitable for their intended use and shall be operated with due care and within all operating safety limits.

5.1.5.5 Forklifts: Forklifts provided shall be supplied with operator and are to be in sound mechanical condition and shall meet all applicable safety laws and regulations. The forklifts shall be suitable for their intended use and shall be operated with due care and within all operating safety limits.

5.1.6 Transportation services:

5.1.6.1 Water Taxi Service: HSP shall provide water taxis to transfer ship personnel to and from the ship at anchorage and the fleet landing pursuant to local procedures and ordinances. At the commencement of service, the HSP is required to advise the ship of scheduled breaks and any changes to the taxi service schedule. Except during inclement weather, water taxi service shall be continuous. HSP shall ensure that all water taxis are fully licensed for passenger transportation, mechanically sound and operational, registered, and insured, including adequate liability insurance, in accordance with local laws and regulations. Each water taxi shall be equipped with at least one clean and serviceable life jacket for each passenger and crewmember, and all life jackets shall be stowed in a readily accessible place. HSP shall obtain written acknowledgement of water taxi service by an authorized ship representative. Logs shall be used to document arrival and departure times.

5.1.6.2 Land Transportation: All vehicles shall be registered, licensed, insured and provided with driver as/if required. The HSP is responsible for delivering all cargo and personnel to the correct location on schedule. The HSP shall provide vehicles that have been properly maintained and serviced. If a vehicle does not meet the requirements of this contract as determined by the ships’ representative, the U.S. Government shall have the right to reject the vehicle for performance of services.

Method of surveillance: Method of surveillance is provided in Attachment (1) QASP Matrix.

Quality Level of acceptance: Performance shall be measured using evaluation criteria contained in Enclosure (1), Evaluation Ratings Definitions.

5.2 Performance Objective #2: Schedule:

Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the task orders, milestones, delivery schedules and administrative requirements. Address the significance of scheduled events and assess the effectiveness of the contractor’s corrective actions. Specific areas of focus for quality are listed below:

Specific Performance Objective examples from the PWS include, but are not limited to:

5.2.1 Initial Boarding: The HSP that has been awarded the task order shall board each ship within two (2) hours after the ships arrival to discuss technical aspects of shipboard requirements and services available in the port. The HSP shall provide an offload schedule to the ship’s Supply Officer during the meeting right after the ship’s arrival.

5.2.2 Did tug and Pilot meet ship as scheduled?

(1) Arrival

(2) Departure

5.2.3 Services (CHT disposal, Oily Waste disposal, trash removal, provision of potable water, etc…) shall be provided IAW agreed to schedule between HSP and ship. CHT removal schedule shall additionally provide sufficient sewage removal frequency and capacity so that the ship’s onboard CHT collection system need not be secured, constrained, or shut down due to lack of available on-ship CHT tank capacity.

5.2.4 The HSP shall check provided on pier toilet facilities to ensure cleanliness. Evidence such as keeping and updating an inspection checklist inside the portable toilet units is required.

5.2.5 Force protection items provided by the HSP shall be coordinated with the requesting unit to ensure that services provided are available and scheduled to show up on time.

5.2.6 HSP shall be present for and participate in daily reconciliation of services with SUPPO or designated representative and COR, when on site.

Schedule Level of acceptance: Performance shall be measured using evaluation criteria contained in Enclosure (1), Evaluation Ratings Definitions.

5.3 Performance Objective #3: Management/Business Relations:

Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract or order, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the Contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts.

(1) Is the Contractor oriented toward the customer?

(2) Is interaction between the Contractor and the Government satisfactory, or does it need improvement?

(3) Did the contractor cooperate with and provide assistance if needed to ensure timely delivery of other goods and services from other vendors contracted by the U.S. Government (i.e.: Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) procured fuel or subsistence items)?

(4) Did the contractor submit timely and accurate invoices? The Government considers lengthy delays in the submission of invoices to be an indication of a contractor's lack of business-like concern for the interests of the customer. The Government's expectation is that contractors will submit invoices into Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) in a timely manner (90 days).

Failure to do so will result in a less than satisfactory rating as part of this element for the port visit. Timely is defined as no later than 90 days after a port visit for which all task order modifications identifying services are complete. In instances where task order modifications are pending, timeliness is considered no later than 90 days after the final task order modification identifying services is complete.

Management Level of acceptance: Performance shall be measured using evaluation criteria contained in Enclosure (1), Evaluation Ratings Definitions.

5.4 Performance Objective #4: Regulatory Compliance:

Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to applicable regulations and codes, using the Evaluation Ratings Definitions. Consider aspects of performance such as compliance with environmental, host nation, and safety, as well as any other reporting requirements in the contract terms and conditions. (e.g. failure to report in accordance with contract terms and conditions, late or nonpayment to subcontractors, trafficking violations, tax delinquency, defective cost or pricing data, terminations, suspension and debarments).

5.4.1 The HSP shall coordinate with the appropriate port authority to arrange for and obtain a pierside or anchorage berthing location for the duration of the period described in RTOP and/or resulting task order. To the extent possible, the berthing location will be consistent with the description included in the RTOP for the port visit if provided, or with other information provided to the HSP by the PCO.

5.4.2 The HSP shall submit a copy of all pertinent port visit documentation including as a minimum the order (i.e. SF 1155), a copy of any quote (s), a copy of the RTOP, and all HSP and any sub-contractor invoices and supporting documentation required by the contract as PDF files to the assigned COR and to other required system(s) timely and accurately. The HSP shall identify the line items as actual or estimated. This option is for those line items where the HSP has not received the actual invoice before the ship leaves port, i.e. telephone bills. The HSP shall include ALL port costs paid by each ship for which the HSP provides husbanding services.

5.4.3 Enterprise-wide Contractor Manpower Reporting Application (ECMRA):

The contractor shall report contractor labor hours (including subcontractor labor hours) required for performance of services provided under this contract for the U.S.

Government via secure data collection site (https://doncmra.nmci.navy.mil). Contracted services excluded from reporting are based on Product Service Codes (PSCs). The excluded PSCs are:

(1) W, Lease/Rental of Equipment;

(2) X, Lease/Rental of Facilities;

(3) Y, Construction of Structures and Facilities;

(4) D, Automatic Data Processing and Telecommunications, IT and Telecom-

Telecommunications Transmission (D304) and Internet (D322) ONLY;

(5) S, Utilities ONLY;

(6) V, Freight and Shipping ONLY.

The contractor is required to completely fill in all required data fields using the following web address https://doncmra.nmci.navy.mil. Reporting inputs will be for the labor executed during the period of performance during each Government fiscal year (FY), which runs October 1 through September 30. While inputs may be reported any time during the FY, all data shall be reported no later than October 31 of each calendar year.

5.4.4 Compliance with FAR Clause 52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons.

Regulatory Compliance Level of acceptance: Performance shall be measured using evaluation criteria contained in Enclosure (1), Evaluation Ratings Definitions

5.5 Performance Objective #5: Utilization of Small Business (Not applicable OCONUS):

5.5.1 Assess whether the contractor provided maximum practicable opportunity for Small

Business (including Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) and Indian Tribes) (including Small Disadvantaged Businesses (which also includes ANCs and Indian Tribes), Women Owned Small Businesses, HUBZone, Veteran Owned, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business, and ANCs and Indian Tribes that are not Small Disadvantaged Businesses or Small Businesses) to participate in contract/order performance consistent with efficient performance of the contract/order.

5.5.2 Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to Small https://doncmra.nmci.navy.mil/

Business participation (including FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Businesses and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (when required). Assess any small business participation goals which are stated separately in the contract/order. Assess achievement on each individual goal stated within the contract/order or subcontracting plan including good faith effort if the goal was not achieved.

5.5.3 For contracts/orders subject to a commercial subcontracting plan, the Utilization of Small

Business factor should be rated “satisfactory” as long as an approved plan remains in place, unless liquidated damages have been assessed by the PCO who approved the commercial plan (see FAR 19.705-7(h)). In such case, the Utilization of Small Business area must be rated “unsatisfactory”.

5.5.4 This area must be rated for all contracts and task orders that contain a small business subcontracting goal.

Utilization of Small Business Level of acceptance: Performance shall be measured using evaluation criteria contained in Enclosure (1), Evaluation Ratings Definitions.

5.6 Performance Objective #6: Cost Control:

5.6.1 The Contractor shall utilize an accurate volumetric measuring device for any volume based services and report the quantity of all volume-based services provided for that visit on the final invoice. Additionally, the contractor will identify the device used for measuring the volume-based services on the final invoice. In the event the contractor relies on any ship board measuring device to determine quantities, the contractor must state “Ship’s device used to determine the quantity invoiced.” on the final invoice.

5.6.2 In the event of a cancellation of any or all services ordered, the Contractor shall take all necessary steps to mitigate any damages/termination costs on behalf of the U.S.

Government.

Cost Control Level of acceptance: Performance shall be measured using evaluation criteria contained in Enclosure (1), Evaluation Ratings Definitions.

6.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

6.1 Customer Feedback – After each ship visit, the ship will submit a Port Visit Check List (PVCL) to indicate requirement receipt and communicate performance of the contractor. Ship complaints will be provided to the contractor. When the COR is off-site, the COR will rely on customer feedback to monitor contractor performance and ensure compliance with contract requirements.

6.2 COR Random Inspection - When the COR is on-site, the COR will conduct random inspections for each non-volumetric service. Random inspections should be accomplished primarily through physical verification of the good or service. Interviews with ship personnel, HSP representatives, and other key stakeholders may assist in accomplishing these inspections. The COR shall provide a descriptive analysis of non-volumetric services randomly inspected in an After Action Report (AAR). The AAR shall be uploaded to HSPortal.

6.3 Deliverable Inspections – 100% inspection by the ship designated representative of all reports, invoicing, and other deliverables. When the COR is on-site, the COR will:

• Be present, at a minimum, of once per each type of volumetric on load or offload, including trash removal, potable water on load, oily waste removal, and CHT removal. During the monitoring of volumetric services ensure ship personnel and the HSP accurately measure and record on load or offload amounts.

• Attend all daily reconciliation meetings to ensure ship designated representatives have accurately and correctly reviewed and/or completed all reports, invoicing, and other deliverables.

The COR shall provide a descriptive analysis of volumetric service surveillance in an After Action Report (AAR). The AAR shall address paragraph 6.3, 1 and 2, and incorporate the daily readings for volumetric services.

6.4 The PCO will use CPARS documentation and QASP along with other written or verbal input from the requiring activity and COR as sources of comments regarding HSP performance.

6.5 When COR is present during port visit, COR will follow duties specified in the COR appointment letter and Husbanding Service Provider Ready Reference Guide to conduct surveillance under this contract.

6.6 When COR is not present during port visit, COR will use the ship's PVCL, Daily Reconciliation, and other Government observations to conduct surveillance under this contract.

6.7 The COR and ship will utilize QASP Surveillance Matrix and Evaluation Rating Definitions to monitor performance and assign evaluation ratings. The PVCL will be used as a template for conducting surveillance under this contract, updated periodically, and made available upon request.

7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

7.1 Within 45 days following the end of each quarter, the COR/COR Program Manager is required to review HSPortal QA report performance objectives. A numeric goal of 3 (Satisfactory) is expected for each performance objective.

7.2 Annually, or as required, CPARS report input will be submitted by COR/COR Program Manager.

8.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

8.1 The Government will evaluate the results, which may then be translated into the specific negative incentives should performance not meet the QASP standards (for failure to perform, see paragraph 9.0).

8.2 The PCO may require the HSP’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the Government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The PCO will conduct in-depth reviews with the HSP as needed. However, if the need arises, the HSP will meet with the PCO as often as required. The agenda of the reviews may discuss:

• Performance measured by the metrics and trends

• Issues and concerns of both parties

• Recommendations made by the PCO based on HSP information

• Issues arising from independent reviews and inspections

8.3 The PCO, COR Program Manager and HSP 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.

8.4 Port visits will be assessed both individually and quarterly. The QASP score for a particular port visit will be computed as the average of each applicable performance objective listed above.

Similarly, the overall QASP score for the quarter will be computed as the average of all port visits during that quarter. An average QASP score for a particular port visit of less than three (3) is considered less than satisfactory performance of that particular port visit. Likewise, an overall average QASP score for the quarter of less than three (3) is considered less than satisfactory performance for the quarter.

8.5 A quarter is defined as a 3-month period of time beginning on the first month of the fiscal year.

Paragraph 3.3 defines the reporting periods to be utilized. If the period of performance begins after a quarter begins the first quarter will include the portion leading up to the first quarter plus the first quarter. The final quarter will be defined as any period of performance left after the last completed quarter.

9.0 REMEDIES FOR NEGATIVE PERFORMANCE

9.1 In the event of a failure to perform and as determined by the PCO, the HSP may be barred from being awarded another task order for a specified period and/or may receive negative past performance ratings, and/or may be terminated for default in accordance with FAR 52.249-8 and FAR Part 49.

9.2 If the Contractor's overall performance is unsatisfactory, the PCO and COR will provide in writing a report identifying the issues that have resulted in the performance being evaluated as “unsatisfactory”.

In response, the Contractor shall inform the PCO and COR in writing, within five (5) calendar days of receipt of the report, the reason(s) for unsatisfactory performance, the action the Contractor proposes to take to remedy the deficiencies, and of the measures the Contractor plans to adopt to ensure that similar deficiencies will not reoccur in the future.

Based upon the contractor’s past performance and plan to solve the problem, the PCO will determine if any further action will be taken.

9.3 Penalty: If an HSP has an overall QASP rating of 2 or 1 for a particular port visit or an overall average for all QASP evaluations throughout a quarterly reporting period of less than satisfactory, the PCO may bar the HSP from being awarded another task order for a specified period and/or may receive negative past performance ratings, and/or may be terminated for default in accordance with FAR 52.249-8 and FAR Part 49.

9.4 Past Performance Ratings: If the penalty above is imposed during any year of the period of performance it will be documented in CPARS; the HSP will not automatically receive an unsatisfactory yearly CPARS review score, however the penalty will prevent them from receiving a score of Exceptional or Very Good for that current year.

9.5 Termination: If the PCO determines that the HSP has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the PCO shall notify the HSP and terminate the contract in accordance with FAR 52.249-8 and FAR Part 49.

Enclosure (1)

Evaluation Ratings Definitions

Rating Definition Note

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. 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.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

See OPNAV 4400.11 (series), Enclosure 1, HSP RRG, Surveillance section, for rating examples

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s 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.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

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.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

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.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

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.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

For rating examples see OPNAV 4400.11 (series), Enclosure 1, HSP Ready Reference Guide, Surveillance section

7.2 Annually, or as required, CPARS report input will be submitted by COR/COR Program Manager.