Kuwait Custodial Contract_QASHP Attachment.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

DLA DISPOSITION SERVICES ARIFJAN, KUWAIT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

4.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

7.0 FAILURE TO PERFORM

Attachment I contains a table that identifies performance-based measures which will be used to monitor contractor performance. The United States Government (USG) will periodically evaluate the contractor’s performance by appointing Contract Officer Representatives to monitor performance to ensure services are received. The USG representatives will evaluate the contractor’s daily performance through personal dealings and direct inspections of work products and demonstrated knowledge of applicable regulations. The USG may conduct random facility inspections and increase the number of quality control inspections if deemed appropriate because of repeated failures discovered or because of repeated customer complaints. Likewise, the USG may decrease the number of quality control inspections if performance dictates. The USG representative shall make final determination of the validity of customer complaints.

If any of the services do not conform to contract requirements, the USG may require the contractor to perform the services again at no additional cost to the USG. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the USG may:

(a) Require the contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

(b) Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed. Performance scoring will be in accordance with the acceptable quality identified in the performance measurements table.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance-based Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the Kuwait Custodial Requirement. This performance-based plan set forth the procedures and guidelines the USG will use in evaluating the technical performance of the contractor.

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 PWS. 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.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

1.2.1: This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the USG to monitor, manage and take appropriate action on the contractor’s performance against expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS. The performance-based PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service is required as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work. 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. 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 self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will utilize its internal quality control system to assess and report their performance to the designated Government Representative.

1.3.2: The Government Representative will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The USG 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 and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1: The Contracting Officer (CO) is responsible for enforcing compliance. The COR is responsible for monitoring contract performance.

2.2: 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 upon the complexity of the services measured as well as the contractor’s performance.

2.3: The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing and communicating the technical performance of the contractor and assisting the contractor. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms (refer to Attachments II and III) 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.

3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

3.1: The performance standards are established in the paragraph of the PWS that covers the specific category of work. The acceptable level of performance is set in the acceptable quality level related to that paragraph.

4.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1: In an effort to minimize the contract administration burden, simplified methods of surveillance techniques shall be used by the Government to evaluate contractor performance. The primary methods of surveillance are audits, reports, equipment maintenance site visits. The Government will use appointed CORs (Contracting Officer Representatives) as well as reports and input from users/customers as sources of comments on the contractor’s performance.

4.2: The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. 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 addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

4.3: The acceptable quality levels (AQL) located in Attachment 1, Required Performance Metrics Table, for contractor performance, are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. For the equipment operational readiness, the desired performance level is established at eighty five percent (85%). The other levels of performance are established at percentages somewhat less than 100%. All are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance.

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

5.1: The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and measured by the required performance metrics in Attachment I.

5.2: The Government’s QA monitoring, accomplished by the COR (and others as designated) will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments II and III. The forms, when completed, will document the COR’s understanding of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the PWS requirements are being met.

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

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

6.1: The Government shall use the observation methods cited to determine whether the AQL’s have been met. The Government’s evaluation is then translated into the specific negative incentives that cause adjustments to the contractor’s monthly payments.

6.2: At the end of each month, the COR will prepare a written report for the CO summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance monitoring of the contractor’s performance. This written report consists of the contractor’s submitted monthly progress report and the completed Quality Assurance Monitoring Forms (Attachment II) will become part of the QA documentation.

6.3: The CO may require the contractor’s project manager or a designated alternate to meet with the CO and other Government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, however if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the CO as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the 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

· Issue arising from independent reviews and inspections

6.4: In addition to QA monitoring, the COR will use the information contained in the contractor’s monthly reports to assess the contractor’s level of performance for each objective measured in this QASP (detailed in attachment I). The COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance. The contractor will discuss with the CO/COR satisfaction ratings receiving a “less than acceptable” rating. For such cases, the contractor should highlight its perspective on factors driving customer satisfaction and present plans to adjust service accordingly to bring the satisfaction rating up to an acceptable level.

6.5: The CO/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.

7.0 FAILURE TO PERFORM

7.1: The contractor may receive deductions or even termination based on failure to perform. The following criteria apply for determining appropriate action:

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

b. Deductions. The Government has the right to withhold a percentage of payment of the monthly cost for performing particular services based on failure to meet performance standards. The percentage of such withholding is identified in the Required Performance Metrics (RPM) Table of Attachment I.

c. 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.

ATTACHMENT I

REQUIRED PERFORMANCE METRICS (RPM) TABLE

Performance Objective

No. If no, explanation required.

1.6.14

COR observation

ATTACHMENT II QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: ___________________

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check): _____ Reports _____ 100% Inspection _____ Periodic Inspection _____

Customer Input/Feedback

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE SELECTED (Check):

_____ Monthly _____ Quarterly _____ as needed

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: _____________________

ATTACHMENT III QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM – CUSTOMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: ___________________ DATE/TIME COMPLAINT RECEIVED: _____________ ________ AM / PM

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT:

_______________________________ (NAME)

_______________________________ (ORGANIZATION)

_______________________________ (PHONE NUMBER)

_______________________________ (EMAIL ADDRESS)

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

RESULTS OF COMPLAINT/INVESTIGATION:

DATE/TIME SERVICE PROVIDER INFORMED OF COMPLAINT: _____________ _________ AM / PM CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN BY SERVICE PROVIDER: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ RECEIVED AND VALIDATED BY _______________________________________________________________________ PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: ______________________