Attachment 1 QASP.pdf

ATTACHMENT

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Troop Support

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. Performance Requirement Summary

The purpose of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to describe the methods that will be used to measure performance and to identify the reports required and the resources to be employed. This acquisition is for services to provide Communication Access Real-Time

Translation (CART) services and Sign Language Interpreter services on-site, off-site and remotely to the Deaf and Hard of Hearing at the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, 700

Robbins Ave., Philadelphia PA 19111. Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support is required to provide CART and interpreter services to be compliant with title 1 of the Americans with

Disabilities Act, as amended, which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of disability; and pursuant to the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.

The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the vendor is meeting the performance standards identified in the RFQ.

This QASP is developed in accordance with the requirements listed in the Performance Work

Statement (PWS) for Communication Access Real-Time Translation (CART) services and Sign

Language Interpreter (ASL) services. The QASP sets forth the procedures and guidelines the

Government will use in evaluating the technical performance of the vendor. This requirement will be awarded as a firm-fixed price Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) Agreement-Unilateral, contract. Therefore, performance measures will be used to assess the vendor’s performance under the contract in order to determine whether the vendor is performing at acceptable levels.

The Government will make objective and subjective assessments of the vendor's performance to determine whether vendor performance is acceptable. The Vendor is expected to perform all functions in a professional manner and prepare accurate and timely documentation.

This QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the vendor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

The vendor’s internal quality control system will set forth the procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The vendor will utilize its internal quality control system to assess and report their performance to the designated Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

The COR will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the vendor to determine how the vendor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The

COR will make decisions based on performance measurement metric data and notify the vendor of those decisions.

The vendor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

The Contracting Officer (KO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration and cost control; and resolving any differences between the observations documented by the COR and the vendor’s performance.

The KO will designate a COR as the Government authority for performance management.

The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, and communicating the technical performance and support of the vendor. The COR will have the responsibility for evaluation of the vendor’s work performance.

The KO will designate a COR as the Government authority for performance management.

The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, and communicating the technical performance and support of the vendor. The COR will have the responsibility for evaluation of the vendor’s work performance.

2. Method of Surveillance/Measures to Validate

In an effort to minimize the contract administration burden, simplified methods of surveillance techniques shall be used by the Government to evaluate vendor performance.

There are various surveillance methods used to monitor contract performance and compliance. When selecting the appropriate method, the COR will take into consideration task criticality, task complexity, time available, mission requirements. The following are preferred methods of surveillance that may be used to assess contract performance:

a. Customer complaint: Any customer observing unacceptable services, either incomplete or not performed, for any performance objectives. The COR will evaluate the complaints on a case-by-case basis. If any Government action or lack of action caused the unacceptable performance, the complaint against the vendor is not valid. The COR will document the invalid complaint and keep for their records. If the complaint is not a result of any Government action, the procedures as detailed in Section 4 will be followed.

b. Periodic Inspection: This type of surveillance is based upon selecting samples for evaluation on other than 100% inspection or on a statistically random basis.

The vendor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication with the Program

Office. The primary objective of professional communications 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 compliments and complaints.

Performance management drives the vendor to be customer focused through initially addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

3. Surveillance Schedule

At the end of each month, the COR may be required to prepare a written report for the KO summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance monitoring of the vendor’s performance.

The contracting officer or Contracting Officer's representative may require the project manager or a designated alternate, to meet with the Contracting Officer and other Government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the vendor, however if the need arises, the vendor may meet with the

Contracting Officer as often as required or per the vendor’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 vendor information

• Issues arising from independent reviews and inspections

In addition to QA monitoring, the COR will use the information contained in the vendor’s monthly status report to assess the vendor’s level of performance for each objective measured in this QASP. The COR must coordinate and communicate with the vendor to resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance. The vendor will discuss with the KO/COR satisfaction ratings receiving a “less than acceptable” rating. For such cases, the vendor should highlight its perspective and present plans to adjust service levels accordingly to bring the unsatisfactory rating up to an acceptable level.

The KO/COR and vendor 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 Contracting Officer.

4. Failure to Perform

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

1. Notifications. Pursuant with FAR Part 52.212-4(m), the KO shall notify the vendor of their failure to meet standards through various means of communications (e.g.: phone, email, etc.) cure notices, or show cause notices and shall inform the vendor’s project manager or designated alternate of such notices.

2. Deductions. The Government has the right to withhold a percentage of payment annual cost for performing particular services based on failure to meet performance standards. The percentage of such withholding is identified in Section 2, herein.

3. Termination. If the Contracting Officer determines that the vendor has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the KO shall consider a notice of termination, consistent with FAR Part 52.212-4(m).

The COR will perform inspections to ensure vendor compliance with the appropriate paragraphs in the PWS, other government requirements, and the vendor’s own procedures, and will record the results of the inspections, noting the date and time. If inspection indicates a performance level is not met, the KO will notify the vendor of the deficiency for correction. The vendor will be given a reasonable time after notification to correct the unacceptable performance. The length of time allowed to correct the problem will depend upon the requirement, complexity of corrective action(s) and the deficiency. The vendor will notify the KO if the time allowed for correction is not adequate. The COR will not consider the correction action(s) until all deficiencies have been corrected and determined by the COR to be adequate. Vendor non-responsiveness, deficiencies not adequately addressed or corrected after notification of such, or estimated dates of completion that are not acceptable to the COR will be forwarded to the KO.