QASP.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives National Property Contract

Asset Forfeiture and Seized Property Division – Field Assistance Branch

Solicitation/Contract: 15A00026Q00000067/TBD

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 (CO/KO)

2.2 The COR

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

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

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled ATF National Property Contract. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Field Assistance Branch of the Asset Forfeiture and Seized Property Division will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and identify required documentation and resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and ensures the government pays only for the level of services received.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around what service or quality level is required, as opposed to how the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the AFSPD Field Assistance Branch to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS 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, if 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 if 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 quality control (QC) program. 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 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 PWS. 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 also 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 QC program.

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 determinations 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 (CO)

The CO is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control, and resolving any differences between 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 COR

The COR is designated in writing by the CO to act as their 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 authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions must 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 the PWS and Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary. If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

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:

• Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR designated inspector

• 100 percent inspection – After inspection, the COR shall review the generated documentation and track results into the Surveillance Activity Checklist

• Periodic inspection – the COR or ATF authorized personnel typically performs the periodic inspection]

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 COR. The 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 for contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. For certain critical activities, such as those involving Warehouse Security, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance.

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 PWS and 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 monitoring form in Attachment 2. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure the required results are achieved.

5.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.1.1 The 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

6.2.1 At the end of each month, the COR will prepare a written report for the CO summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This report, which includes the contractor’s submitted monthly report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2), 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 designated alternate to meet with the

COR and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss the 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:

• Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

• Issues and concerns of both parties

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

• Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

• Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

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 CO.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Required Services (Task)

Performance Standards

Acceptable Quality Levels

Methods of

Surveillance

Incentive (Positive and/or Negative)

(Impact on Contractor Payments)

Warehouse/Conex Security

Secure within ≤ 3 Business Days

95% 100% COR

Review

Performance via CPARS/meeting with COR to identify and correct issue.

STO/Consignment request from COR Inquiry Response.

Response within ≤ 24 Hours

100% Phone/Email Logs

Staffing Meeting / CPARS

Intake Confirmation Photos & STO ≤ 3 Business Days

100% 100% COR

Review or COR designee

Staffing Meeting / CPARS

Data Integrity, Invoicing submissions

Invoice submitted 14 days after POP. Data integrity of sites maintained

95% 100% COR

Review or COR designee

Staffing Meeting / CPARS

Site Security Zero Unauthorized Access Events

100% Unannounced Inspections

Cure Notice / Termination

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________