W50S6U26QA012_Attachment-3_Quality_Assurance_Surveillance_Plan_17May26v1.3.pdf

Version 1.3 dated 17 May 2026

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Drug Demand Reduction Program Management Services

For

195th Wing and 129th Rescue Wing

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

4.2 Customer Feedback

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

5.2 Monitoring Forms

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.2 Reporting

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

ATTACHMENT 2: QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

1 INTRODUCTION

This QASP is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Drug Demand Reduction Program Management Services. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Government will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the Government to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” 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 and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP 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 develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

The Contracting Officer (KO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the COR and the contractor. The KO 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, and must be identified and designated by the KO.

2.2 The COR

The COR is designated in writing by the KO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. 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. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the KO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms 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 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and quality levels are included in the PWS and Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary. The Government will use these standards and quality levels to assess contractor performance, document performance results, identify deficiencies, request corrective action when appropriate, and support contract administration. Failure to meet a performance standard or AQL may result in documented surveillance findings, corrective action requests, consideration in past performance records, or other contractual remedies available to the Contracting Officer under the terms of the contract.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance can be found under the “Surveillance Method/By Whom” column in Technical Exhibit 1 – PRS of the PWS.

4.2 Customer Feedback

4.2.1 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 can be measured through customer complaints.

4.2.2 Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor.

4.2.3 Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing. The detailed nature of the complaint must be stated, document signed and forwarded to the COR. Upon receipt of a complaint, the COR will investigate and document the findings on the monitoring form, Attachment 2 and in the COR file.

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

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

The Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) included in Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary Table, are used to assess contractor performance against selected PWS requirements. The AQLs allow the contractor flexibility in determining how to perform the work while giving the Government a basis to evaluate whether required outcomes are being achieved. For certain critical activities, including those described in PWS paragraphs 5.3 and 5.4 and their subparagraphs, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to overall mission performance.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the monitoring form in Attachment 2. The form, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required quality levels are being achieved.

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

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.1.1 The Government will use the surveillance methods identified in this QASP and the PWS to determine whether the contractor has met the applicable performance standards, service levels, and Acceptable Quality Levels. If the contractor does not meet a required standard or AQL, the COR may document the deficiency and request a corrective action plan that identifies the cause of the deficiency, corrective action to be taken, responsible contractor personnel, and the date by which the contractor expects to restore performance to the required level. The COR shall provide documented performance concerns to the Contracting Officer for review. Any corrective action or other contractual remedy shall be determined and administered only by the Contracting Officer in accordance with the contract.

6.2 Reporting

6.2.1 At the end of each month, the COR will prepare a written report for the KO summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the completed quality assurance monitoring form (Attachment 2), will become part of the QA documentation and COR file. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

6.3.1 The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the

KO, COR and other government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR 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 will meet with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

Issues and concerns of both parties

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

Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

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

6.3.3 The 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, or metrics that affect contract requirements shall be incorporated only by written contract modification issued by the Contracting Officer.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

The primary methods of surveillance are identified in the Performance Requirements Summary in the PWS. If the QASP includes a duplicate PRS as an attachment, the PWS shall control in the event of inconsistency.

Task – Paragraph Location

Performance Standard – Objective

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Surveillance Method/By Whom

5.1 and subparagraphs Meet all tasks outlined within prescribed window/deadline.

Met/Not Met; or On-time ≥ 90% if recurring/timed.

Monthly, Periodic inspection, or Customer complaint By the Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

5.2 and subparagraphs Meet all tasks outlined within prescribed window/deadline.

Met/Not Met; or On-time ≥ 90% if recurring/timed.

As needed Periodic inspection, or Customer complaint By the COR

5.3 and subparagraphs Meet all tasks outlined within prescribed window/deadline.

100% of events meet full compliance within prescribed window/deadline

Monthly, Periodic inspection, or Customer complaint By the COR

5.4 and subparagraphs Meet all tasks outlined within prescribed window/deadline.

100% of events meet full compliance within prescribed window/deadline

Monthly, Periodic inspection, or Customer complaint By the COR

5.5 and subparagraphs Meet all tasks outlined within prescribed window/deadline.

Met/Not Met; or On-time ≥ 90% if recurring/timed.

As needed Periodic inspection, or Customer complaint By the COR

I II II II I

ATTACHMENT 2: QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

☐ As Needed ☐ Monthly ☐ Periodic Inspection ☐ Customer Complaint

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

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: _________________