Attachment 7.doc

For Official Use Only

Procurement Sensitive Information

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Attachment 7 Office of Information Security (OIS)

- working with -

Office of Acquisition and Grants (OAG)

Division of Information Technology Support Services (DITSS)

Social Security Administration

Independent Verification & Validation

Attachment 7: Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

1.0 General

1.1 Introduction

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 37.604 requires that agencies develop quality assurance surveillance plans (QASP) when acquiring services. These plans shall recognize the responsibility of the contractor to carry out its quality control obligations and shall contain measurable inspection and acceptance criteria corresponding to the performance standards contained in the performance work statement (PWS). FAR 46.401(a) stipulates that QASPs should specify 1) all work requiring surveillance; and 2) the method of surveillance. The Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the obligations and requirements of the contract. The role of the Government in quality assurance is to ensure that the Contractor achieves contract standards.

1.2 Purpose

The Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Office of Information Security (OIS) developed this QASP for review of the Contractor’s initiatives in meeting performance goals. The QASP defines procures that the Government may follow to verify that the Contractor meets required performance standards as specified in the Statement of Work (SOW). A QASP is a guide for review, and the Government may change its review procedures over the course of the contract, to ensure that the Contractor successfully performs on the Contract.

1.3 Government Approach The Government will monitor work performed through the services of the Contracting Officer (CO), Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and/or Quality Assurance Technician (QAT). The QASP comprehensively guides the COR/QAT’s activities and is in a format to facilitate understanding and implementation.

The COR/QAT will evaluate the Contractor’s performance to ensure compliance with the contract. The COR/QAT may point out discrepancies to the Contractor as noted in the course of evaluation duties. However, the COR/QAT may neither direct the Contractor outside of the scope or intent of the contract, nor tell the Contractor how to perform a task.

The COR/QAT will conduct checks on how the Contractor performs LAN maintenance services. The Performance Requirements Summary (See Exhibit 1) identifies the acceptable quality levels for Contractor performance. The Government will use the Contractor Discrepancy Report (Exhibit 2) for quality assurance surveillance. The COR will work with SSA end-users to determine the success of the IV&V contract.

2.0 Roles and Responsibilities

2.1 Contracting Officer

The CO is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the COR or QAT. 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.

2.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative

The CO designated the COR, in writing, to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. The COR’s written appointment letter identifies the COR’s limitations. 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 to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The Contract must refer any changes that the Contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action. The COR has the responsibility for completing quality assurance monitoring forms to document inspection and evaluation of the Contractor’s work performance.

3.0 Methodologies to Monitor Performance

3.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, SSA intends to use simplified surveillance methods to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance include:

· Random Sampling: Random surveys of end-users. The COR/QAT will use the Ansi Zi table at Exhibit 2 and the number of incidents to determine the number of surveys to distribute;

· Incidental Observation: Onsite review of the Contractor performing onsite maintenance, task orders, drop shipment, addition/removal/substitution of equipment, destruction of failed hard drives, and reporting requirement;

· 100% Inspection: Review of all information reported, or hands-on inspection of the contract deliverables.

3.2 Customer Feedback

SSA expects the Contractor 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 customer complains are an effective measure of this effectiveness.

Performance management drives the Contractor to focus on customers through internally addressing customer complains and investigating issues/problems; however, the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the CO, COR, or QAT, as opposed to the Contractor.

For SSA to consider customer complaints valid, they must be clear and in writing, detailing the nature of the complaint; include some form of signature; and sent to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the information substantially the same as that contained in Exhibit 1.

The COR may also obtain customer feedback either from the results of a formal customer satisfaction survey or from random customer interviews.

The COR must maintain all reports in the file, and make them available to the CO upon request.

3.3 Acceptable Quality Levels SSA structured the Acceptable Quality Levels (AQL) included in Section 5.0 of the QASP, Performance Requirements Summary Table, for Contractor performance to allow the Contractor to manage how it performs the work. SSA set critical activities, at a required performance level of 100 percent. SSA entered other levels of performance to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance.

4.0 Analysis of Quality Assurance Assessment

4.1 Determining Performance

SSA will use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the Contractor met the performance standards. If the Contractor has not met the minimum requirements, SSA may ask the Contractor to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels. Moreover, SSA may ask the Contractor for consideration as a result of the lower performance level. Consistent failure may result in other formal contractual remedies, possibly including termination.

4.2 Reporting

At the end of each quarter, 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 written report, which includes information from the Contractor’s submitted reports and SSA’s internal information, will become part of the quality assurance document. It will enable SSA to demonstrate whether the Contractor is meeting the stated performance standards.

4.3 Reviews and Resolution

The CO may require the Contractor’s project management, or a designated alternative, to meet with the COR and other government personnel, as deemed necessary, to discuss performance evaluation. The CO 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 may meet with the CO or COR as often as required or per the Contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include, but are not limited to, the following:

· Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis;

· Issues and concerns of both parties;

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

· Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness; and

· Issues arising from the performance monitoring process.

The COR must coordinate and communicate with the Contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

The CO and the Contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action. SSA and the Contractor must clearly document decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels via bilateral contract modification.

5.0 Required Performance Standards/Quality Levels For the identification of required performance standards and quality levels, please see below. If the Contractor meets the required service or performance level, the Government will pay the Contractor based on the number and types of reports successfully completed at the rates identified in Attachment 1, Pricing Tables.

Exhibit 1: Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR)

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT

GOVERNMENT ACTION

1. To (Contractor and Project Manager Name):

2. From (PO/QAT):

3. Discrepancy of Problem (Describe in detail. Attach continuation sheet if necessary.):

4. Contractor Notified (Contact Point):

5. Date & Time

6. Contract Administrator’s Signature:

7. Date:

CONTRACTOR ACTION

8. To Contract Administrator:

9. From (Contractor Program Manager):

10. Contractor Actions (Response to cause, corrective actions, and preventative measures):

11. Contractor Program Manager’s Signature:

12. Date

GOVERNMENT CLOSE-OUT

13. Government Evaluation (Acceptance, Partial Acceptance, or Reaction):

14. Government Action (Cure Notice, Show Cause, Other):

15. Contracting Officer’s Signature:

16. Date

Exhibit 2: Sample Size Table

ANSI ZI SAMPLE SIZES