Attachment_1_-_QASP.docx
DOCX document 20 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W81XWH-16-T-0156
- Issued by
-
Department of the Army Medical Command
About this file
16-T-0156 Attachment 1 - QASP
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 16-T-0156_Combined_Synopsis_Solicitation_Final.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
W81XWH-16-T-0156
Bruker In-Vivo Xtreme II System w/ MARS Attachment 1: Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)
1.0. Vision. The USACEHR’s mission is to develop surveillance capabilities to detect, assess, and prevent health effects from adverse environmental, physiological, and psychological exposures.
2.0 Purpose. This QASP is a government-developed document used to determine if the contractor's performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:
What will be monitored
How monitoring will take place
Who will be conduct the monitoring
How monitoring efforts and results will be documented
2.1. The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its internal quality control measures. The QASP provides the structure for the Government's surveillance of the contractor's performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the Government's responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating contractor performance.
2.2. The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the Contractor's internal quality control procedures. This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.
2.3. The Government will provide a copy of the QASP to the Contractor to facilitate open communication. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the contractor.
Bottom line, the QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.
3.0. Authority. Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), clause 52.246-2 Inspection of Supplies – Fixed Price, which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the contracting officer or a duly authorized representative.
4.0. Roles and Responsibilities. The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.
4.1. Contracting Officer (KO). The KO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Determine and document the final assessment of the contractor's performance in the governments past performance tracking system.
Assigned KO: To be provided upon contract award Organization or Agency: U.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity (USAMRAA) Telephone: To be provided upon contract award Email: To be provided upon contract award
Assigned Contract Administrator:
U.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity (USAMRAA) Primary: Rudolph Spencer, Contract Specialist Email: rudolph.j.spencer.civ@mail.mil
4.2. Contracting Officer's Representative (COR). The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor's performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the contractor's actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to many any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government's behalf.
Assigned Contract COR: To be provided upon contract award Organization or Agency: U.S. Army Center for Environmental Health Research (USACEHR) Telephone: To be provided upon contract award Email: To be provided upon contract award
4.3. Contractor Representatives. The following contractor employee serves as the contractor's Program Manager for this contract.
Contractor Representative: To be provided upon contract award Organization or Agency: To be provided upon contract award Telephone: To be provided upon contract award Email: To be provided upon contract award
5.0. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance. This section describes the special requirements for this effort. The following sub-sections provide details of various considerations on this effort.
5.1. Contract Surveillance. The goal of the QASP is to ensure that Contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR's contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, and Contractor, which enables positive, open, and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of contractor performance against contract requirements. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the contractor's performance. Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the government, is responsible for management and Quality Control/Quality Assurance actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.
5.2. Performance Surveillance Summary: The below Surveillance Matrix (see following page) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the Contractor. This summary details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.
Surveillance Matrix
| Task |
| Indicator |
| Performance Standard |
| Performance Threshold |
| Method of Surveillance |
| Performance Rating |
| Quality of tasks performed |
| All PWS tasks |
| Tasks performed at optimal performance level |
| 100% compliance |
| Trainee feedback/ complaints |
| Review of deliverables |
| All PWS deliverables |
| All Deliverables completed and submitted in accordance with the PWS distribution requirements. |
| 100% compliance |
| 100% inspection by the COR at Government Location |
Performance thresholds define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor's performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The matrix should be used to form the foundation of the COR's inspection checklist. In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.
Performance Rating Criteria
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .