A01_Attachment_0002__QASP.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Software Engineering Center Platform Mission Equipment Software Branch

W56JSR-17-R-0005 Task Order 0001

4 April 2017

Table of Contents

1.0 Vision

1.1 Purpose

2.0 Authority

3.0 Scope

4.0 Government Resources

5.0 Responsibilities

6.0 Methods of QA Surveillance

7.0 Documentation

8.0 Performance Ratings and Criteria

Appendix 1 - Corrective Action Report (CAR) Appendix 2 - Customer Complaint Record Appendix 3 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Software Engineering Center Platform Mission Equipment Software Branch

1.0 Vision

To provide outstanding system/software engineering support with cost effectiveness to customers while ensuring reliability, maintainability, interoperability, and configuration integrity of the software components for mission equipment.

1.1 Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure the systematic quality assurance methods are employed in the administration of this performance-based service. The intent is to ensure that the contractor performs in accordance with the performance objectives and the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract. Task Order 0001 provides for support services to Software Engineering Center (SEC) Platform Mission Equipment Software Branch (PMESB).

• Provide system/software engineering and integration support for Aviation Systems, Tactical Air Traffic Control, Position/Navigation/Terrain systems, and Command and Control systems.

• Provide support for Post Deployment and Post Production (PPSS/PDSS) activities for the Platform

Mission Software Equipment Branch systems described in Appendix B System Description.

• Provide MIL-STD-1553 engineering, validation and testing, and system integration.

A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

2.0 Authority

Authority for the issuance of this QASP is provided under the Contract Section E Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3.0 Scope

A. The QASP is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract.

B. The contractor’s performance under this Contract will be evaluated by the Government as described in this QASP. The first evaluation will cover the period ending twelve(12) months after the effective date of the award with successive evaluations being performed for each twelve-month period thereafter until the end of the Period of Performance or until the completion of the contractor's performance (if a completion type Order). For each period, the Government will evaluate the contractor’s performance.

The evaluation will encompass all work performed by the contractor at any time during the period but will not include cumulative information from prior reports.

4.0 Government Resources

The following definitions for Government resources apply to this plan:

• Contracting Officer - A person duly appointed with authority to enter into (Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) or administer (Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) contracts and make related determination and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO for this contract identified in section G. The ACO will be designated upon award. Contracting Officers are appointed via a written warrant, which sets forth limitations of authority.

• Contracting Officers Representative (COR) - An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as his/her authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. The COR will be named in the resulting contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment.

• Alternate Contracting Officers Representative (ACOR) - An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as his/her authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. Like the COR, the ACOR will be designated in the resulting contract. The limitations of authority are contained in a written letter of appointment. The ACOR may act in the capacity of the COR when the COR is not available.

• Government Project Leads (PL) - The COR designates one or more individuals Government Project Leads to assist in administering specific projects under the contract.

5.0 Responsibilities

The following Government resources shall have responsibility for the implementation of this QASP:

• Contracting Officer (KO) The Contracting Officer ensures the performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the Contracting Officer who assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractors performance. The Contracting Officer provides QASP input to matters relating to Tables 5 and 6.

• Contracting Officers Representative (COR) The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the contractor's technical performance in accordance with the COR appointment or delegation letter. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Governments behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect the contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

• Alternate Contracting Officers Representative (ACOR) The ACOR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s technical performance in accordance with the ACOR appointment or delegation letter. The ACOR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Governments behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect the contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

• Government Project Leads (PL) - The Government Project Leads is responsible for assisting in administering a particular project under the contract. A Government PL cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the contract, make commitments, or authorize any changes on the Government's behalf.

6.0 Methods of QA Surveillance

A. QASP - The below-listed methods of surveillance shall be used by the COR in the technical administration of this QASP. The QASP will be a determinant factor in the decision to exercise any Option period.

B. Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), the marketplace for information technology, engineering, and management support services, is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this contract. Additionally, an evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed at the end of each year of performance. The Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, and management for this procurement. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and the continuation of the order, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool with the QASP.

7.0 Documentation

In addition to providing quarterly reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Governments performance of the quality assurance function. All such records will be maintained for the life of the order. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the order.

8.0 Performance Ratings and Criteria

A. The Government will evaluate the contractor's performance. The Contracting Officer, utilizing input provided by the COR, will assign one of the following Overall Performance Ratings:

OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING

EXCEPTIONAL

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the government’s benefits. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no problems and contractor actions were highly effective.

VERY GOOD

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the government benefits. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

SATISFACTORY

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

MARGINAL

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements.

The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNSATISFACTORY

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

B. Performance Evaluation Criteria: The contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the standards and acceptable quality levels (AQLs) identified in W56JSR-17-D-TBD Task Order 0001 performance work statement (PWS) section 3.2 through and including 3.2.3.9. The criteria evaluated and associated rating is as follows:

Criteria: Task Performance

Exceptional Work product frequently exceeds AQLs defined in the PWS.

Very Good Work product always meets and occasionally exceeds AQLs defined in the PWS.

Satisfactory Work product routinely meets AQLs defined in the PWS.

Marginal Work product occasionally fails to meet AQLs defined in Surveillance Matrix.

Unsatisfactory Work product fails to meet AQLs defined in the PWS.

Criteria: Staffing

Exceptional

Contractor provides highly qualified personnel. Contractor reassigns personnel to ensure proper coverage. Actual lapses in coverage occur very rarely, if ever, and are managed per contract policy. Contractor ensures staff training remains current.

Very Good Contractor provides a mix of qualified and some highly qualified personnel. Lapses in coverage occur infrequently and are managed per contract policy.

Satisfactory Contractor provides qualified personnel. Lapses in coverage may occasionally occur and are managed per contract policy.

Marginal Contractor provides marginally qualified personnel. Lapses in coverage occur more than occasionally

Unsatisfactory Contractor provides marginally qualified or unqualified personnel. Lapses in coverage occur regularly.

Criteria: Timeliness

Exceptional Contractor routinely delivers ahead of deadlines, schedules, and responds immediately to Government requests.

Very Good Contractor routinely meets deadlines and schedules and occasionally delivers early and responds immediately to Government requests.

Satisfactory Contractor routinely meets deadlines, schedules, and responds quickly to Government requests.

Marginal Contractor occasionally misses deadlines, schedules or is slow to respond to Government requests or is occasionally non-responsive to Government requests

Unsatisfactory Contractor frequently misses deadlines, schedules, or is slow to respond to Government requests or is non-responsive to Government requests

Criteria: Customer Satisfaction

Exceptional Exceeds customer expectations.

Very Good Routinely meets or occasionally exceeds customer expectations.

Satisfactory Meets customer expectations.

Marginal Contractor occasionally fails to meet customer expectations

Unsatisfactory Fails to meet customer expectations

Criteria: Problem Resolution

Exceptional Problems are non-existent, or the contractor takes corrective action without Government involvement.

Very Good Problems occur infrequently and are generally resolved quickly with minimal Government involvement.

Satisfactory Problems are resolved quickly with minimal Government involvement

Marginal Problems are generally resolved but take unusual Government effort to resolve or take an excessive amount of time to resolve

Unsatisfactory Problems are unresolved, repetitive, or take excessive Government effort to resolve

Criteria: Responsiveness

Exceptional Problems are non-existent, or the contractor takes corrective action without Government involvement.

Very Good Problems occur infrequently and are generally resolved quickly with minimal Government involvement

Satisfactory Problems are resolved quickly with minimal Government involvement.

Marginal Problems are generally resolved but take unusual Government effort to resolve or take an excessive amount of time to resolve

Unsatisfactory Problems are unresolved, repetitive, or take excessive Government effort to resolve.

Criteria: Communication

Contractor takes a proactive approach such that communications are almost always clear, effective, and timely.

Very Good Contractor routinely communicates with Government in an effective and timely manner and is frequently proactive in managing communications

Satisfactory Contractor routinely communicates with Government in an effective and timely manner.

Marginal Contractor occasionally fails to communicate with Government in an effective and timely manner

Unsatisfactory Contractor often fails to communicate with Government in an effective and timely manner.

Criteria: Cost Management

Reductions in direct costs to the Government below estimated costs are noteworthy. The contractor provides detailed cost analysis and recommendations to Government for resolution of problems identified. Funds and resources are optimally used to provide the maximum benefit for the funds and resources available. Documented savings are apparent.

Very Good

Contractor routinely completes the effort within the originally agreed upon estimated cost and occasionally causes reductions in direct costs below estimated costs. Provides cost analysis and recommends to Government resolution of problems identified.

Satisfactory

Contractor routinely completes the effort within the originally agreed to estimated cost. The contractor provides measures for controlling all costs at estimated costs. Funds and resources are generally used in a cost-effective manner. No major resource management problems are apparent.

Marginal Contractor occasionally fails to complete an effort within the originally agreed to estimated cost, i.e. cost overruns occasionally occur

Unsatisfactory Contractor routinely fails to complete the effort within the originally agreed to estimated cost, i.e. cost overruns frequently occur

Criteria: Cost Reporting

Reports are clear, accurate, and pro-active. Problems and trends are addressed thoroughly, and the contractor’s recommendations and corrective plans are implemented and effective.

Very Good Reports are clear, accurate, and occasionally pro-active.

Problems and trends are generally addressed with some recommended actions to resolve.

Satisfactory Reports are timely, accurate, complete, and clearly written.

Problems and trends are addressed, and analysis is also submitted.

Marginal Reports are occasionally late, inaccurate, incomplete or unclear

Unsatisfactory Reports are generally late, inaccurate incomplete or unclear.

Appendix 1 - Corrective Action Report (CAR)

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MAJOR MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

Appendix 2 - Customer Complaint Record

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

Appendix 3 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER 2. CONTRACTOR 3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

5. COR PHONE 6. SUSPENSE DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY (IF DEFICIENCY BOX WAS

CHECKED)

10. DETAILED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CONCUR NON-

CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-

CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. CONCUR NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS