QASP.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

FOR

B1B Power Takeoff (PTO) Shaft

(CONTRACT #: TBD)

Prepared By:

Taylor Olpin

7 February 2025

419 SCMS/GUEA

6040 Gum Lane

Hill AFB, UT 840565826

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………..3

1.1 PURPOSE………………………………………………………………….…….3

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH…………….…….3

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY……….……………3

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES…………………..……………………………..4

3.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE……………………..4

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING AND ANALYSIS…………………….5

5.0 FAILURE TO PERFORM………………………………………………………………5

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Contract TBD is an AF led contracting effort used to satisfy repair requirements for the B1B PTO Shaft. It is a repair contract with Firm Fixed Price Sole Source Requirements arrangement. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides the standard of surveillance for this contract.

This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines that the Contracting Officer (CO) and the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will use in evaluating the technical performance of the contractor.

1.1 PURPOSE

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to measure performance and to identify the reports required and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

1.1.2 This QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating the Contractor’s performance.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” repair is required to satisfy AF needs. This QASP will define the performance management approach used by the COR to monitor, manage, and take appropriate action on the contractor’s performance against expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS. Performance management relies 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. The 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 contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management also represents a significant shift from the more traditional Quality Assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether or not outcomes are being achieved and migrates away from scrutiny on compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (Federal, State, and Local) and compelling business situations such as safety and health. An outcome 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 at the desired levels of performance.

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

1.3.1 The contractor’s internal quality control system will set forth the staffing and procedures for selfinspecting the delivery, quality, responsiveness, repair & support, and development of contracted repairs. The contractor will use its own internal quality reporting system to review and assess performance and report to the COR. The COR and system engineer may be involved with the rating system as requested by the contractor. The attributes rated in this performance process should cover the contractor’s ability to meet the requirements in the PWS.

1.3.2 The COR will monitor performance using the input of the contractor’s internal report coupled with communicated performance objectives and taskings. The COR will make decisions based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes to ensure cost, schedule, and performance are managed effectively.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The CO is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration and cost control. The CO is also responsible for resolving any differences between observations documented by the COR and the contractor’s performance.

2.2 The CO will designate one fulltime COR as the Government authority for performance management. Additional representatives serving as Technical Inspectors will be engaged by the COR as necessary to support the contract services required.

2.3 The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, and communicating the technical performance of the contractor and assisting the CO. The COR will have the responsibility for completing monthly performance reports to document the contractor’s compliance to the PWS.

3.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

3.1 In an effort to minimize the contract administration burden, simplified methods of surveillance techniques shall be used. The primary methods of surveillance will be through 100% inspection of all deliverables based on timeliness, quality, and cost control. The contract authority used is FAR 52.2465; Inspection of Services Cost Reimbursement.

3.1.1 Inspection is a technique that will be used to evaluate the contract deliverables before they are officially accepted by the government. The inspection will be performed by the assigned systems engineer and reported on to the COR. The items inspected in the deliverable will include, but are not limited to, schedule, detail, quality, accuracy, and conformance to standards in accordance with its accompanying CDRL.

3.1.2 A Technical Inspector will be assigned by the COR to help evaluate the deliverables of the contract. The Technical Inspector will likely be the weapon system engineer. He/she will be required to update the COR on a regular basis as to how the contractor is performing. The Technical Inspector will be expected to provide examples of performance whether it is positive or negative.

The Technical Inspector will be required to work closely with the contractor to ensure the project meets government expectations.

3.1.3 The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication with its customers. The COR will be the main interface with the contractor in tracking project progress.

Constant communication will be needed to ensure that government requirements are met. This communication will be the key in assessing contractor performance as required by the PWS.

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING AND ANALYSIS

4.1 The expected outcome for this effort is communicated in the PWS under Section III – Work Requirements.

4.2 The Government’s Quality Assurance monitoring, accomplished by the COR (and others as designated by the contracting officer) will be reported to the contracting officer each month. The report will detail each paragraph in the requirements section of the PWS. The report will also include the following details of projects currently on contract: Period of Performance (POP), dollars spent as shown by Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF), by the Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR) and by the Milestone Delivery Schedule, and work completed as required by the PWS.

4.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA monitoring forms.

4.3 The COR will define a frequency of indepth reviews with the contractor and, if necessary, the contractor will meet with the CO as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of these reviews may discuss:

• Monthly performance measured by the metrics and trends

• Issues and concerns of both parties

• Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trend

• Recommendations made by the COR based on contractor information

• Issues arising from independent reviews and inspections

4.4 The COR must communicate with the contractor when an unacceptable level of performance is defined. To resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance the COR will coordinate with the contractor to formulate a plan to bring the performance rating to an acceptable level.

4.5 The CO/COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical, and longterm 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 CO.

5.0 FAILURE TO PERFORM

5.1 The contract may be terminated based on the contractor’s failure to perform. The following criteria apply for determining appropriate action:

1. Notifications. Consistent with FAR Part 49, the CO shall notify the repair provider of failure to meet standards through QA reports, cure notices, or show cause notices and shall inform the service provider project manager or designated alternate of such notices.

2. Termination. If the CO determines that the contractor has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the CO shall issue a notice of termination, consistent with FAR Part 49.

Revisions to QASP: At the discretion of the Contracting Officer, revisions to this QASP are allowable and may be implemented. Revisions to this surveillance plan are the joint responsibility of the COR and the Contracting Officer. The Government may review and revise the QASP as circumstances warrant throughout the contract period. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the Contractor. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. The Contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities will receive copies of the original QASP and revisions.