Attachment_2_FRC_ASE_Surveillance_Activity_Checklist_-_FINAL_REV_2.doc

N68335-17-R-0012 Surveillance Activity Checklist N68335-17-R-0012

Surveillance Activity Checklist

Surveillance Activity Checklist (SAC)

Fleet Readiness Center Aviation Support Equipment (FRC ASE) Maintenance Contractor Support Services (CSS) 1.

Purpose

This Surveillance Activity Checklist (SAC) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure the systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the service contract in accordance with the statement of work (SOW). The intent is to ensure that the contractor performs in accordance with the metrics and the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract.

This contract requirement is for Maintenance Support Services in support of the Fleet Readiness Aviation Support Equipment (FRC ASE) in Solomons, MD and other FRC locations. Specifically, the contractor shall provide maintenance, repair and overhaul services in support of surface ship and Maritime Prepositioning Ship off-loads and redeployments. The contractor shall support the repair, rework, configuration, modification and reclamation of Support Equipment (SE) for Naval Air Systems Command Program Managers. This level of effort based term contract will consist of the following Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) per year: forty four (44) Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee labor CLINs for all of the FRC ASE customers and FRC locations, five (5) Firm Fixed Price labor CLINs in support of the Marine Corps Air Station, Futenma, Okinawa, Japan, Comalapa, El Salvador (Navy and Coast Guard), Support Equipment Refurbishment Facility (SERF), Naval Air Station (NAS) North Island, CA and SERF Everett, NAS Whidbey Island, WA, a Cost CLIN for the Other Direct Cost for travel and material and a Not Separately Priced CLIN for the Contract Data Requirements for a total of two hundred and fifty five (255) CLINs for the five (5) year period of performance plus a transition CLIN for the Program Manager in the base period. The anticipated period of performance includes a one year base period with four (4) one year option periods. The period of performance commences upon award. A properly executed SAC will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

FRC ASE Solomons supports the execution of the Navy’s 1C7C – Equipment Maintenance budget which funds the rework of fleet aviation SE and that for the New Ships Construction Outfitting, Refueling Complex Overhaul and Maritime Prepositioning Forces Programs. In addition to the Navy 1C7C Programs previously identified, FRC ASE Solomons manages SE Refurbishment Facilities and executes the a number of Special Programs, for example: Naval Supply Systems Command Weapon Systems Support Quick Engine Change Kit Repair/Overhaul, Coast Guard SE Rework, and Program Managers (Air) support.

2.

Authority

Authority for issuance of this SAC is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3.

Scope

To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between Quality Control Plan and the SAC. The contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth in the contract.

The SAC, on the other hand, is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering the results specified in the contract.

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 effort is Mrs. Jennifer Vaccaro, 2.5.2.5. 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 service contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

Alternate COR (ACOR) - An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as their authorized representative, in the absence of the COR, to assist in administering the contract. The ACOR 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 SAC:

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 who 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. In addition to the continuous monitoring of performance, the COR will also submit an annual assessment in the Navy’s Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). For CPARS, the COR assesses general quality of the product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, small business compliance, and other important areas. 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.

Alternate COR (ACOR) – In the absence of the COR, the ACOR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The ACOR 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 information maintenance, repair and overhaul support services is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this contract. Additionally, an evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed at the end of each year of performance. This evaluation will be one determinant in performance of each sequential period. The Government for this procurement will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, utilization of small business, and other important areas. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and future orders, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool with the SAC.

b.

SAC - The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used by the COR and ACORs in the technical administration of this SAC. In addition to the below instructions, the form to be used for documentation of quality assurance surveillance is the SAC provided herein.

7.

Surveillance

Enclosures (1) and (2) set forth the performance standards, incentives, and surveillance methods for the contractor and COR / ACORs while enclosure (3) provides the checklist and means for the COR to document the results of the surveillance on a quarterly basis, and shall be provided to the Contracting Officer on a quarterly basis.

Each permanent site will submit a Contractor Monthly Performance Evaluation to the FRC ASE COR, unless otherwise delineated in the SOW. All FRC ASE workload to include NAVAIR Support Equipment Rework Control Numbers (CNUM), NAVSUP Quick Engine Change and Component Repair program Transaction Item Reporting (TIR) numbers and other Special Project workload will be included in the monthly performance evaluation. Once measured, these metrics will be used to arrive at a monthly score for the contractor based on whether they did not meet, met, or exceeded the stated goals. Only items identified as completed and ready for return to the Fleet in a “Ready for Use/Issue” condition, at the close of business the last working day of the month will be used for the calculation of this measurement.

Circumstances or external influences beyond the control of the Contractor that impact the ability of the Contractor to meet performance standards will not affect Contractor performance measurements.

This section describes the metrics used to measure contractor schedule and performance. The performance data from all FRC ASE sites will be aggregated by the FRC ASE COR, who will then calculate one score per metric (one score for Performance, or one score for Schedule, or one for each). Once measured, these metrics will be used to arrive at a monthly score for the contractor based on whether contractor met, did not meet, or exceeded the stated goals. Metrics for all contractor tasks will be rolled up into an overall performance and schedule score. All performance evaluations will be entered into the CPARS database by the FRC ASE COR.

Contractor work accomplished at FRC ASE sites will be scored based upon the types of workload being conducted at each of the FRC ASE Sites. Each of the types of workload and their associated performance and/or schedule criteria are outlined in Tables 1 and 2 below.

FRC ASE’s support equipment rework workload end items and components will be measured using the measures identified in Table 1. These measures mirror the performance measures by which the Commander Fleet Readiness Centers measures the overall success of FRC ASE.

Table 1. Performance Reporting for SE Rework

FRC ASE’s maintenance workload in support of surface ships and Maritime Prepositioning Forces ship off-loads and redeployments will be measured using the SE Available for Tasking metric. For FRC ASE support that is in support of the day to day operations of an operational unit, the Schedule Execution metric will be used. Both of these metrics are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Performance Reporting for Sail Plan & Operational Support

Schedule Measurement. Schedule measurement will be based on the Turnaround Time (TAT) metric and will be scored as follows:

SE Rework. Schedule measurement will be assessed on all SE Rework workload per Table 1 based upon the actual TAT associated with each CNUM, and National Identification Number (NIIN), by Site. All items identified as completed and ready for return to the Fleet in a “Ready for Use/Issue” condition, at the close of business the last working day of the month will be used for the calculation of this measurement. The actual TAT (actual number of calendar days expended from the date of receipt at the FRC ASE site until the equipment is signed-off and its status is complete) will be compared to the planned TAT.

The Government Off-Site Leads and the FRC ASE COR will score each item of SE completed during the month using a SE Rework Site Performance Worksheet. Upon the completion of each item, the Government will enter the following information into the worksheet: Date Completed, CNUM/Maximo Work Order, Planned TAT and Actual TAT. The worksheet will calculate the item’s score based upon the measurements shown below.

Schedule measurement based upon Table 1 work will be scored as follows:

To receive a score of “+1”, or exceeds standard, the Contractor must complete the SE being scored in a number of days lower than the acceptable TAT.

To receive a score of “0”, or meets standard, the Contractor must complete the SE being scored in the established TAT.

To receive a score of “-1”, or unacceptable, the Contractor must complete the SE being scored in an amount of days above the established TAT.

NOTE: During the course of an item being processed for repair, the contractor shall maintain a log of all delays that adversely affected the TAT time of an item. The delays will be reviewed at the completion of work to determine if those delays adversely affected the turnaround time. The Contractor Site Lead will ensure that no other work can be accomplished and that all other work is completed on the item before the item enters into a delay status. Material delays resulting from parts that were ordered prior to the required delivery date will be considered for a TAT adjustment. Parts not ordered prior to the required delivery date by the Contractor will not be adjusted from the TAT. TAT adjustments will be made on a day for day basis.

Each of the site’s individual CNUM/Maximo Work Order Scores are grouped by NIIN and totaled to determine each NIIN Score. Each of the individual NIIN scores are then added together to identify a Site NIIN Total. The Site NIIN Total is then scored as follows: if the sum is zero, the score is “0”; if the sum is a positive number, the score is “+1”; if the sum is a negative number, the score is “-1”. The result of the scoring becomes the Site’s Monthly Score.

This Metric will be weighted according to type of workload by the FRC ASE COR on the Contractor’s Monthly Performance Measurement Report.

Performance Measurement. Performance measurement will be based on Workload Standard (WLS), Support Equipment Available for Tasking, Scheduled Maintenance Execution, and Direct Labor Yield.

Performance measurement will be assessed on all SE Rework workload using Table 1 based upon the WLS associated with each CNUM/Maximo Work Order, and NIIN, by Site. All items identified as completed and ready for return to the Fleet in a “Ready for Use/Issue” condition, at the close of business the last working day of the month will be used for the calculation of this measurement. The actual number of hours expended will be compared to the planned WLS hours.

The Government Off-Site Leads and the FRC ASE COR will score each item of SE completed during the month using a SE Rework Site Performance Worksheet. Upon the completion of each item, the Government will enter the following information into the worksheet: Date Completed, CNUM / Maximo Work Order, Planned Workload Standard and Actual Hours Expended. The Performance measurement based upon Table 1 will be scored as follows:

To receive a score of “+1”, or exceeds standard, the Contractor must complete the SE being scored in a number of hours lower than the established WLS.

To receive a score of “0”, or meets standard, the Contractor must complete the SE being scored within the established WLS.

To receive a score of “-1” or unacceptable, the Contractor must complete the SE being scored in an amount of hours above the established WLS.

Each site’s individual CNUM/Maximo Work Order Scores are then grouped by NIIN and added to determine each NIIN Score. Each of the individual NIIN scores are then added together to identify a Site NIIN Total. The Site NIIN Total is then scored as follows: if the sum is zero, the score is “0”; if the sum is a positive number, the score is “+1”; if the sum is a negative number, the score is “-1”. The result of the scoring becomes the Site’s Monthly Score.

This Metric will be weighted according to type of workload by the FRC ASE COR on the Contractor's Monthly Performance Measurement Report.

For each site that is conducting workload associated with the Sail Plan, the Government will monitor the associated workload utilizing the SE Available for Tasking Worksheet. The SE Available for Tasking Worksheet identifies the quantity of each type of equipment planned for upload to each ship and the quantity of each type of equipment available for redeployment/upload at the end of the maintenance evolution. A score for this work is assigned based upon the percentage of total amount of equipment available for redeployment/upload. This metric is only reported in the month that the SE reload is completed. The Government Off-Site Leads and the FRC ASE COR will determine the scores as follows:

To receive a score of “+1”, or exceeds standard, the Contractor shall have completed the required scheduled maintenance, and have 98-100% of the SE ready for reload/upload according to the Sail Plan.

To receive a score of “0”, or meets standard, the Contractor shall have completed the required scheduled maintenance, and have 95 – 97% of the support equipment ready for reload/upload according to the Sail Plan.

To receive a score of “-1”, or unacceptable, the contractor shall have completed the required scheduled maintenance, and have less than 95% of the support equipment ready for reload/upload according to the Sail Plan.

Note: Reporting on availability of SE to meet ship schedules will only be reported at the end of the month in which all work associated to a specific Sail Plan has been completed.

This Metric will be weighted according to the type of workload by the FRC ASE COR on the Contractor’s Monthly Performance Measurement Report.

Operational Support. For each site that is conducting workload associated with Operational Support, the Government will monitor that workload utilizing the SE Scheduled Maintenance Execution Worksheet. The SE Scheduled Maintenance Execution Worksheet identifies the required number of planned maintenance requirements to be completed each day, and the number of inspections actually completed by the Contractor. The Contractor will be scored based upon whether or not the requirement was met (“Met” or “Not Met”). A monthly score will be assigned to this workload based upon the final percentage of days that met the requirement at the end of the reporting period. The scores are assigned as follows:

To receive a score of “+1”, or exceeds standard, the Contractor shall have completed 90 – 100% of the required scheduled maintenance during the month.

To receive a score of “0”, or meets standard, the Contractor shall have completed the 80 – 89% of the required scheduled maintenance during the month.

To receive a score of “-1”, or unacceptable, the Contractor shall have completed 79% or less of the required scheduled maintenance during the month.

This Metric will be weighted according to the type of workload by the FRC ASE COR on the Contractor’s Monthly Performance Measurement Report.

At the end of each month, all Government Off-Site Leads will forward all applicable workload spreadsheets (i.e., SE Rework, Sail Plan, or Operational Support) as identified in Tables 1 and 2, and the hours expended that month against each of the workload types to the FRC ASE COR. The FRC ASE COR will take each of the scores for each of the types of workload involved and combine them using the Combination Workload Spreadsheet. The Combination Workload Spreadsheet combines the scores from each of the spreadsheets used to measure each of the different types of workload.

The workload mix and associated metrics may change based upon the needs of the Fleet Customers and how FRC ASE must move workload to satisfy those needs.

Once all of the site worksheets are completed for each of the FRC ASE sites, the FRC ASE COR will compile each of the Site scores using the Site Score Compilation Worksheet. Each individual Site Score will be entered into the Site Score Compilation Worksheet and added together to determine an Enterprise Total. The Enterprise Total is then scored as follows: if the sum is zero, the score is “0”; if the sum is a positive number, the score is “+1”; if the sum is a negative number, the score is “-1”. The result of this step of scoring becomes the Enterprise Score and will be used as determination for CPARs entries.

8.

Documentation

In addition to providing quarterly reports 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 Quality Assurance 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.

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Required Service (Performance Requirements)

(Quality Assurance) Incentives

Enclosure 2

97% of the support equipment ready for reload/upload according to the Sail Plan.

The COR will monitor availability of SE based upon 100% inspection of Sail Plan scheduled requirements using the SE Available for Tasking Worksheet a minimum of monthly reflecting actual requirements and available

SE to meet Sail Plan requirements.

See

89% of the required scheduled maintenance during the month.

DATA STANDARDS

Method/Measure Incentives

INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this contract.

Incentives

Base:

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of an option 1.

Option I:

Not more than 2 of the measurement areas rated below “Very Good”. None of the measurement areas are rated “Marginal” or below.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of an option. 2.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for receiving a “Satisfactory” or higher CPARS rating.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for receiving a “Satisfactory” or higher CPARS rating.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for receiving a “Satisfactory” or higher CPARS rating.

All SOW/CDRL efforts will be assessed focusing on the following:

Quality of Product or Service – Assess the contractor’s effort to transform operational needs and requirements into an integrated solution. Areas of focus may include the planning and management of program efforts, the quality of support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of program management specialties, management of interfaces, and the management of a totally integrated effort of all program management concerns to meet cost, performance, and schedule objectives. Assess how successfully the contractor meets program quality.

Schedule – Assess the contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule by assessing the contractor’s efforts during the assessment period that contribute to or effect the schedule variance. Also address significance of scheduled events, discuss causes, and assess the effectiveness of contractor corrective actions.

Cost Control – Assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. Is the contractor experiencing cost growth or underrun? If so, discuss the causes and contractor-proposed solutions for the cost overruns. For contract where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor provided person-hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent to which the contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources in each work effort should be assessed.

Business Relations – Assess the timelines, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction.

Management – Assess the contractor’s success with timely award and management of subcontracts, including whether the contractor met small/small disadvantage and women-owned business participation goals. Discuss the extent to which the contractor discharges its responsibility for integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract; identifies and applies resources required to meet schedule requirements; assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by contract; communicates appropriate information to affected program elements in a timely manner. Assess the contractor’s risk mitigation plans. If applicable, identify any other management areas that are unique to the contract.

Utilization of Small Business – Assess the contractor’s success in utilizing and meeting small business goals / concerns.

Other areas – Assess additional evaluation areas unique to the contract or that cannot be captured elsewhere.

The evaluation ratings are as follows:

Performance Based Evaluation: The Government will evaluate contractor performance based on their ability to complete work specified in the SOW. The contractor shall be evaluated using the following ratings:

Exceptional Performance: Contractor’s performance of virtually all contract requirements consistently exceeds the acceptable standards and in addition provides numerous significant, tangible or intangible, benefits to the Government (e.g., improved quality, responsiveness, increased timeliness, or generally enhanced effectiveness of operations). The few areas for improvement are all minor. There are no recurring problems. Contractor’s management initiates effective corrective action whenever needed.

Very Good Performance: Contractor’s performance of most contract requirements is consistently above acceptable standards and provides significant tangible and intangible benefits to the Government (e.g., improved quality, responsiveness, increased timeliness, or generally enhanced effectiveness of operations). Although some areas require improvement, these areas are minor and are offset by better performance in other areas. Few, if any, recurring problems have been noted, and the contractor takes satisfactory corrective action.

Satisfactory Performance: Contractor’s performance of most contract requirements meets the acceptable standards with some tangible or intangible benefits to the Government (e.g., improved quality, responsiveness, increased timeliness, or generally enhanced effectiveness of operations). Although there are some areas of very good or excellent performance, these are more or less offset by unsatisfactory performance in other areas.

Marginal: Performance does not meet 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: Contractor’s performance of most contract requirements is inconsistent and frequently does not always meet acceptable standards. Quality, responsiveness, and timeliness in many areas require attention and action. Corrective actions have not been taken or are ineffective.

SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY CHECKLIST

Quarterly Surveillance:

The COR will perform a quarterly assessment of Technical Performance Cost and Schedule Performance, Management and Quality of Work utilizing the CPARS evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure 2.

Measure

Provide Scheduling / Turnaround Time Support.

SE to meet Sail Plan requirements.

TBD

Quarterly Summary of Ratings:

Quality of Product or Service Schedule

Number of Exceptional

Number of Very Good

Number of Satisfactory

Number of Marginal

Number of Unsatisfactory

Number of Unsatisfactory

Cost Control

Business Relations

Management

Utilization of Small Business

Other Areas

Number of Unsatisfactory____

Annual Surveillance:

The COR will perform an annual assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure 2. This annual assessment will occur at the midpoint of each year following the award of the contract and cover the previous 12 months, except for the first year of the contract which will cover only the previous 6 months.

Measure

Utilization of Small Business