Attachment 0007 - Revised QASP FS Basic_Final.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

for

FCS&TD Engineering, Technical, and Logistics Support Services

Reviewed By:

Cynthia Mack Requiring Activity

Charlotte Sylvain Contracting Officer

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose: The purpose of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to establish the systematic methods and procedures that the Government will use to monitor and evaluate contractor performance for the mission essential elements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The mission essential elements in the PWS are listed in the performance metric column of the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) (See Section 7).

1.1.1 The QASP defines the essential roles and responsibilities of the integrated product team. The QASP sets forth performance standards, evaluates contractor performance against those standards, and establishes corrective action procedures as appropriate.

1.1.2 The QASP provides direction to personnel performing surveillance activities in accordance with established surveillance methods.

2.0 Performance Management Strategy/Approach: The performance management approach is to control and incentivize contractor performance based on established methods, procedures, and ratings. The approach is described in this section.

· The contractor’s performance is surveyed against the performance metrics in the PRS. The surveillance methodology applied will be specific to the performance metric being monitored. (See PRS Chart in Section 7).

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

3.0. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 Government. The role of the Government in quality assurance is to ensure the contractor is performing in accordance with the contract requirements, and to the extent the contractor is doing so.

3.2 Contracting Officer. The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, cost control and safeguarding the interests of the United States Government in contractual relationships. Only the PCO is authorized to bind the Government and then, only to the extent of the authority entrusted to them through the limitations of their warrant.

3.2.1. The PCO will designate one full-time Contracting Officer Representative (COR) on the base award. Additionally, a COR will be appointed on each task order and be the Government authority for performance management, including inspection and/or acceptance responsibilities. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the requirements of the individual task orders, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the PCO at the time of task-order issuance.

3.2.2. At the time of task-order award, the PCO will inform the contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all quality assurance personnel assigned to the contract.

3.3 Contracting Officer Representative. The COR is designated in writing by the Contracting Officer to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments, or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that may affect contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action.

3.3.1. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and to ensure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance.

3.3.2. The COR monitors contractor performance to ensure contract requirements are met for: Performance, Cost, and Schedule.

3.3.3. The COR ensures that contract quality requirements, provisions, standards, and thresholds are defined, practical, enforceable, necessary, and verifiable.

3.3.4. The COR evaluates and documents contractor performance in accordance with this QASP, the PWS, and contract requirements.

3.3.5. The COR notifies the Contracting Officer of any significant performance deficiencies using a Contractor Discrepancy Report with supporting documentation.

3.3.6. The COR maintains surveillance documentation.

3.3.7. In coordination with the PCO, the COR may recommend improvements to the QASP and PWS throughout the life of the contract.

4.0. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

4.1 Scope of Work: The Combat Capabilities Development Command (CCDC) Armaments Center, Fire Control Systems & Technology Directorate (FCS&TD), requires engineering and support in the areas of Artillery Fire Control Systems, Mortar Fire Control Systems, Direct Large and Medium Caliber Fire Control, Small Arms Fire Control, Optics, Remote Weapon Station Fire Control, Fire Control Software, Ballistic Kernels, Firing Table support and related equipment. The effort shall include all aspects of the life cycle support required to maintain FCS&TD products/programs. To successfully support these programs, the contractor shall offer innovative solutions to the proposed taskings, which are cost effective to the Army. These solutions shall involve critical thinking, the leveraging of previous efforts performed for the Army and/or other related Department of Defense (DoD) agencies, effective communication with Government agencies and other support contractors, effective management of personnel and resources, and the ability to adapt to new requirements in the ever changing environment of today’s battlefield.

4.2 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

4.2.1 Quality Control. The contractor is responsible for all management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract.

4.2.2 Level of Performance Evaluation. The contractor will be evaluated in the following Performance Objective areas: PWS Paragraphs 4.2 Mortars and Common Fire Control Support, 4.3 Artillery Fire Control Support; 4.4 Configuration Management; 4.5 Small Arms Fire Control Systems; 4.6 Armored Vehicle and Avionic Fire Control; 4.7 Prototyping; 4.8 Technical Documentation Support; 4.9 Administrative and Data Management Support; 7. Security.

4.2.3 Timely Feedback to Contractor. Timely feedback to the contractor on deliverables that do not meet contract requirements will be provided by the COR in coordination with the PCO, and documented in writing as required. Prompt feedback is essential so that the contractor can develop and implement a corrective action plan. The contractor's corrective action must be reported to the COR in coordination with the PCO for approval.

5.0 SURVEILLANCE. The COR will perform monthly surveillance. The surveillance will focus on the quality and effectiveness of the contractor’s data deliverables as well as the services provided. Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's Program Manager (PM) or on-site representative when a defect/issue is identified. The COR, when designated, shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting specific performance standards. The COR(s) assigned to perform surveillance of the contractor’s performance will manage surveillance documentation for their assigned contract requirements. The documentation will include the following:

· PWS and other pertinent parts of the contract.

· Other applicable documentation, such as (1) customer and user comments and (2) data and technical reports as required.

5.1 Surveillance Methods. The below surveillance methods may be used by the Government to evaluate contractor performance, when appropriate. The COR will use the following surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

a. PLANNED - DIRECT OBSERVATION. (Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.)

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. (Uses a comprehensive evaluation of selected outputs. Inspections may be scheduled [Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Annually] or unscheduled, as required.)

c. PERIODIC SAMPLING. (Variation of random sampling. However, sample is only taken when a deficiency is suspected. Sample results are applicable only for the specific work inspected. Since sample is not entirely random, it cannot be applied to total activity performance.)

d. RANDOM SAMPLING. (Designed to evaluate the outputs of the award requirement by randomly selecting and inspecting a statistically significant sample. Highly recommended for large quantity repetitive activities with objective and measurable quality attributes.)

e. USER SURVEY. (Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling. Random survey is conducted to solicit user satisfaction. Appropriate for high quantity activities that have historically been satisfactory. May also generate periodic and 100% inspections.)

f. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Highly applicable to services provided in quantity and where quality is highly subjective.)

g. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all outputs. Most applicable to small quantity, but highly important services. May be used where there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.)

5.2 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 is measured through the performance metrics survey.

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

5.2.2. The customer has the option to communicate complaints to the COR in coordination with the PCO as opposed to the contractor.

5.2.3. In order to be considered valid, customer complaints, must set forth clearly, and in writing, the detailed nature of the complaint and must be signed and forwarded to the COR in coordination with the PCO.

5.2.4. Customer feedback may also be obtained from the results of either formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

6.0 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.

6.1 A copy of Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) Reports shall be provided to the COR in coordination with the PCO. Issues and concerns that cannot be resolved at the working level or which impact on contractual requirements shall be reported to the PCO for resolution and contractual action. The reporting requirements are to be delineated in the individual task orders.

6.2 Service Contract Report: The COR is responsible for validating the contractor’s input into the Service Contract Reporting (SCR) Module at sam.gov. The COR is to obtain a user name and password, and validate that the contractor has completely filled in required contractor information at the web site by November 30 of the first year of the contract and annually by November 30 thereafter for the duration of the contract, or sooner if the contract is closed out. The COR shall perform this validation during the month of November each year. The COR shall report the SCR results in the November Monthly COR Report (due in December of each year) to the PCO each year. Discrepancy Reports are as required.

7.0 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY/QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Threshold

Quality

All performance objectives shall be In Accordance With (IAW) the Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements of awarded task orders.

Engineer Review

Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

4.3 Artillery Fire Control Support

Timeliness, Completeness, All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

Test Engineering checkout and verification Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

Engineer Review

Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

Quality All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

Engineer Review Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

Engineer Review Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

4.7 Prototyping

Timeliness, Completeness, All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

100% Compliance

COR Review Engineer Review Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

4.8 Technical Documentation Support

Timeliness, Completeness, Quality All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

100% Compliance

COR Review Engineer Review Contractor will immediately correct or establish an acceptable remedy within five (5) working days

All performance objectives shall be IAW the PWS requirements of awarded task orders.

7.1 Performance Requirements Summary (PRS): The chart above establishes the PRS. The PRS identifies the mission essential performance metrics required for the effort, performance objectives, performance indicators, performance standards, performance standards, thresholds and objectives, method of surveillances, and corrective actions for each Task-Order.

7.2 Non-Compliant Performance. If the contractor’s performance does not meet contract requirements, the COR will document the discrepancy as a non-conformance, and inform the PCO. Performance deficiencies or non-conformances must be submitted to the PCO using a Contractor Discrepancy Report approved by the COR. It must include supporting documentation and its validity must be approved by the PCO.

7.2.1 Revising and resubmitting any deliverable that does not meet contract requirements shall be at no cost to the Government. In this event, the contractor shall provide the Government a written response as to why the performance threshold was not met (cause), how performance will be returned to meet contract requirements, and how recurrence of the cause will be prevented in the future.

7.2.2 The COR may require the contractor’s Program Manager (PM), or a designated alternate, to meet with the Government representative as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define the 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 Government representative in coordination with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

a. Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

b. Issues and concerns of both parties

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

d. Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

e. Technical Interchange Meetings including but not limited to: Preliminary Design Reviews, Critical Design Reviews, and Test Readiness Reviews

7.2.3 The COR and PCO must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding non-compliant contract performance.