New Acquisition QASP.pdf

TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 01 – QUALITY ASSURANCE SUREVEILLANCE PLAN

1. PURPOSE.

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

What will be monitored?

How monitoring will take place?

Who will conduct the monitoring?

How monitoring efforts and results will be documented?

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

The QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

2.1. Contracting Officer (KO)

The KO is shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance. The KO will designate in writing the 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 KO.

Assigned KO:

Organization/Agency: MSC

Telephone:

Email:

2.2. Contract Specialist (CS)

The CS acts as an acquisition consultant and serves as liaison between the contractor and the supporting contracting office.

Assigned CS: George DelMoral

Organization/Agency: MSC

Telephone: (757) 443-5887

Email: george.a.delmoral3.civ@us.navy.mil

2.3 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

The COR is designated in writing by the KO 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 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 KO 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.

COR:

Organization/Agency:

Telephone:

Email:

3. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets, or does not met these standards via a contract surveillance report parallel to the contract deliverables.

The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix, located in Paragraph 3 in the Performance

Work Statement (PWS) includes performance standards. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

Performance

Requirement (Required

Service)

Performance

Emphasis

(Quality, Timeliness, and/or Cost)

Desired

Results of

Performance

(Outcome)

Performance Standard Acceptable

Quality

Level (AQL)

Performance

Assessment (Sampling

Method)

Actions to be taken if

Requirement Not Met

Paragraph 2.2., Monthly Status Reports

Quality, Timeliness

Accurate reports delivered on time

Monthly reports are delivered accurately and on time

Standard is met 95% of the time

SME review of deliverables and reporting to the COR

Reflected in CPARS review

Paragraph 2.3, Deliverable

Requirement List

(DRL) Review

Quality, Timeliness

Accurate reports delivered on time

Monthly reports are delivered accurately and on time

Standard is met 95% of the time

SME review of deliverables and reporting to the COR

Reflected in CPARS review

Paragraphs 2.4, 2.4.1, 2.4.2

Quality, Timeliness Accurate reports delivered on time

Monthly reports are delivered accurately and on time

Standard is met 95% of the time

SME review of deliverables and reporting to the COR

Reflected in CPARS review

Paragraph 2.5 Quality, Timeliness Accurate reports delivered on time

Monthly reports are delivered accurately and on time

Standard is met 95% of the time

SME review of deliverables and reporting to the COR

Reflected in CPARS review

Paragraph 2.6 Quality, Timeliness Accurate reports delivered on time

Monthly reports are delivered accurately and on time

Standard is met 95% of the time

SME review of deliverables and reporting to the COR

Reflected in CPARS review

Paragraph 2.7 Quality, Timeliness Accurate reports delivered on time

Monthly reports are delivered accurately and on time

Standard is met 95% of the time

SME review of deliverables and reporting to the COR

Reflected in CPARS review

CTIP Compliance Compliance with FAR

52.222-50, Combating

Trafficking in

Persons

Compliance with CTIP

Inspection by COR Standard is met 100% of the time

Random Immediately reported to

KO pursuant to DFARS

PGI 222.1703 (4) and reflected in CPARS review

4. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE.

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

Regardless of the surveillance methods, the COR shall always contract the contractor’s task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR, with assistance from the KO, shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard/AQL.

4.1. Direct Observation – Government point of contact (POC)/subject matter expert (SME) will monitor daily.

4.2. Management Information Systems (MIS) – Monthly Government feedback from the

POC/SME via reports pulled from various systems.

4.3. Periodic Inspection – Monthly feedback.

4.4. Government User Feedback – An evaluation checklist will be used to monitor adherence to the contract. The checklist will mirror the tasks and deliverables contained in the contract and will be reviewed monthly by the Government POC and submitted to the COR.

4.5. Random Sampling – Randomly selecting and inspecting a statistically significant sample.

4.6. Progress or Status Meetings – Weekly production meetings.

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the inspection of services clause in the contract becomes the basis for the KO’s actions.

5. RATINGS.

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. The following ratings shall be used:

Rating Description

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

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.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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.

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.

6. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

6.1. Acceptable Performance

The Government shall document positive performance. A report template is attached.

Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee payments, award fee payments, or other actions.

6.2. Unacceptable Performance

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case, the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and present it to the contractor’s manager or on-site representative. A CRR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

7. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

7.1. Frequency of Measurement

During contract/order performance, the COR shall take periodic measurements monthly via the contract surveillance report as specified in the AQL column of the Performance

Standards Summary Matrix and shall analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

7.2. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings

The COR shall meet with the contractor, at a minimum, once a week to assess performance and shall provide an annual written assessment.

ATTACHMENT 1

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY (TO BE COMPLETED BY

COR or ACOR)

SERVICE (Please include a description of the service being provided):

SURVEY PERIOD:

Please provide ratings and comments regarding the Contractor’s performance in each area below using the following ratings:

SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY

OVERALL RATING

Please provide an overall rating of the contractor’s performance:

a.) Quality of Product or Service:

b.) Timeliness (Deliverables were met in accordance with the contract schedule):

c.) Customer Satisfaction

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

Signed: __________________________________ Contracting Officer’s Representative

ATTACHMENT 2

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)

1. Contract Number: [insert contract number]

2. TO: [Contract Task Manager or On-Site Representative Name]

3. FROM: [Insert COR Name]

4. DATE AND TIME OBSERVED:

5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM:

6. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:

A written corrective action plan is / is not required.

If a written corrective action plan is required, include the following: The written corrective action plan will be provided to the undersigned no later than [insert number] days after receipt of this CDR.

Prepared By: [Insert Name]

Signature Date

Received By: [Insert Name]

Signature Date

The COR may initiate a CDR at any time, including whenever the number of monthly recorded defects for a performance standard exceeds the allowable number of defects; any time unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal collective action; and whenever an unfavorable trend is detected in contractor performance.