DCPDS DRAFT Atch 17 - QASP.doc

Attachment 17

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

for the

Defense Civilian Personnel Data System (DCPDS) Operations, Sustainment, and Maintenance Contract

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the Defense Civilian Personnel Data System (DCPDS). This performance-based plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Civilian Personnel Management Service (CPMS) will use in evaluating the technical performance of the DCPDS 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 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.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.2.1 This QASP defines the performance management approach taken by CPMS to monitor, manage, and take appropriate action on the Contractor’s performance against expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS. 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 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 DCPDS COTR.

1.3.2 The DCPDS COTR 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 decisions based on performance 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) or Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration and cost control; and resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) and the Contractor’s performance.

2.2 The CO will designate a COR, one full-time COTR and one alternate COTR 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 COTR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, and communicating the technical performance of the Contractor to the CO and the Contract Program Manager. The COTR will review the quarterly Performance Metrics (Service Level Agreements) report provided by the Contractor and provide feedback to the Contractor.

3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

The Contractor shall provide CPMS service support in accordance with the PWS. The performance standards are established in attachment 15 (Performance Metrics) of the PWS and are collected monthly and reported to the COTR on a quarterly basis. The performance metrics scoring is identified in attachment 15 as well. The financial impacts for poor performance are identified in section 6.1.1 of the PWS.

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 reports and customer input/feedback. The Government will use the COTR and other appointed representatives, as well as reports and input from users/customers as sources of comments on the Contractor’s performance. The input/feedback may include emails, meetings and meeting results, or other sources of correspondence. In addition, individual and overall project status may be reported through white papers, technical papers, and other documentation provided by the Contractor; regular monthly reports on DCPDS system performance; summary reports of deliverables and other products provided by the Contractor and/or requested by the Government.

4.2 The Contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and the Government. The primary objective of professional 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 addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

4.3 The performance metrics, located in Attachment 15 to the PWS and discussed in section 6.1 of the PWS, are structured to allow the Contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. There are ten (10) performance metrics with each score ranging from 1 to 5. The disincentives begin at 10% reduction when the Contractor falls below an average score of 3.75 and no single score is less than 3 and the maximum penalty is 20% reduction when the Contractor falls below 3.25 and no single score is less than 3. All performance metrics 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 begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and measured by the required performance metrics in Attachment 15 and are reported to the COTR on a quarterly basis.

5.2 The Government’s QA monitoring will be accomplished on a continuous basis by the COTR and others as designated. The monthly performance results shall be reported by the Contractor in the quarterly performance report.

5.2.1 The COTR will review the quarterly performance metrics and provide feedback to the Contractor.

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

6.1 The Government shall use observation methods to determine whether performance metrics are met. The Government’s evaluation of the performance metrics are collected monthly and reported on a quarterly basis. If poor performance is realized then disincentives that cause adjustments to the Contractor’s monthly payments are exercised by the Government as described in section 6.1.1 of the PWS.

6.2 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 COTR will hold a management integrated process team (IPT) meeting every three (3) weeks, which is an in-depth review between the COTR, Government functional mangers, and the Contractor’s Program Manager and top-level managers. 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:

· Quarterly 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 COTR based on Contractor information

· Issues arising from independent reviews and inspections

6.3 The COTR must coordinate and communicate with the Contractor to resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance. The Contractor shall discuss with the CO/COTR 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 levels accordingly to bring the satisfaction rating up to an acceptable level.

6.4 The CO/COTR and Contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long–term courses of action. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels must be clearly documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification.

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:

1. Notifications. Consistent with FAR Part 49, the CO shall notify the Contractor of failure to meet standards and shall inform the Contractor’s project manager or designated alternate of such notices.

2. 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 section 6.1.1 of the PWS.

3. 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.

As of: 16 Sep 11

PAGE