Attachment_3_-_QASP.pdf

Attachment 3

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Close Combat Tactical Trainer Post Deployment Software Support

(CCTT-PDSS)

1. PURPOSE.

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

• What will be monitored.

• How monitoring will take place.

• Who will conduct the monitoring.

• How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor.

Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document.

Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

a. Contracting Officer (PCO) - The PCO 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 PCO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the PCO, the COR shall provide documentation to the PCO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the PCO for action.

c. Other Key Government Personnel – The Government personnel listed below shall be monitoring the contract.

a. Mr. William Sanchez, Project Director

b. Ms. Carolyn Wardell, Contract Specialist

3. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Performance standards define desired services. The Performance Standard Ratings are outlined in Table 1. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards. A variety of tasks, as listed in Table 2, shall be evaluated to determine the Contractor’s performance.

Table 1. Performance Standard Ratings

Rating Definition of Rating

Exceptional

0.9 – 1.0

Performance substantially exceeds expected levels of performance.

Numerous significant achievements exist.

No significant deficiencies. 100% of the time accurate information is submitted to the Government.

Very Good 0.8

Performance exceeds expected levels and some significant achievements exist.

Although some deficiencies may exist, they are only minor and correctable. 90% of the time, costs are within plus 10% of cost estimates. 90% of time is within plus 10% of time estimates.

Satisfactory 0.7

Performance meets expected levels.

Minimum standards are exceeded and good practices are evident in contract operations. Achievements or deficiencies may or may not exist; but neither is significant.

Marginal 0.6

Performance meets expected levels in some areas and is less than expected levels in other areas. Minimum standards and good business practices are mostly met. No significant achievements exist, but some deficiencies do exist.

Unsatisfactory

0.1 – 0.5

Performance is less than expected. No significant achievements exist. However, significant deficiencies do exist.

Table 2. Performance Standards for Post Deployment Software Support

PWS Paragraph AQL

3.1.1 Program Management The Contractor’s effective and economical organization and implantation of all areas of effort, including management and technical effort, which are required to meet contract requirements. Particularly to be considered are:

1. Establishment of internal mechanisms to assure proper supervision of work force (including subcontractors and vendors)

2. Access to and responsiveness of key personnel to Government needs or to dynamic/urgent requirements, especially the communication, /coordination and cooperation with the PEO STRl PDSS Team to dependably resolve problems that may arise in communication, planning, or other related areas.

3. Efficient completion of assigned tasks and overall effective use of available resources.

4. Quality of the business relationships with the PEO STRI PDSS Team.

5. Quality of the business relationships with all of the Contractor’s, subcontractors and vendors.

3.1.1.1 Technical and Management

Work Planning

The Contractor’s technical progress based on:

1. Overall technical approach and rationale.

2. Thoroughness of approach.

3. Innovativeness and creativity.

4. Integration of technical efforts.

3.1.1.2 Work Scheduling The development, implementation, control and maintenance of the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that presents, plans and schedules to meet the requirements of this contract.

3.1.1.3 Financial Management The Contractor’s:

1. Actual costs and realistic cost projections as they relate to the estimated contract cost.

2. Cost planning/cost effectiveness

3. Timely and accurate cost reporting

4. Clarity of and ability to trace cost relative to work schedule technical progress.

5. Cost reduction/cost avoidance initiatives.

3.1.1.4 Integrated Performance

Management System

1. The degree of Contractor conformance with schedules, as established.

2. The Contractor’s early identification of schedule problems and inventiveness in overcoming them to maintain progress.

3. The extent to which deliverables were submitted in accordance with established schedules.

3.1.12 Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) The effectiveness of PDSS IPTs, as well at IPTs that support CCTT. The IPT minutes will be monitored by the COR to assure appropriate tracking of actions and issues are taking place.

3.1.5 Cybersecurity All DoD Cybersecurity and Information

Assurance (IA) requirements managed, tracked, and adhered to.

3.6 Quality System Plan (QSP) The requirements of the contract are specified in the QSP, which include methods for identifying, correcting deficiencies, and corrective action that will take place.

3.10 Contractor Manpower Contractor Manpower as described in the TO8 PWS will be monitored and tracked by the COR.

4. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE.

The following surveillance methods listed below may be used by the COR in the administration of this QASP. Regardless of the surveillance method, the Project Director shall contact the contractor’s program manager when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR is responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in correcting the problem.

a. Direct Observation.

1. Reviews will be conducted as applicable and in accordance with the requirements in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

2. Continuous review of requirements analysis and functional allocation with the contractor.

3. COR visits to the contractor’s facility and interaction with the contractor’s engineers.

4. Interaction with the contractor’s team during the entire period of performance for the contract.

b. Management Information Systems (MIS).

Reports will be provided in accordance with the requirements in the PWS.

c. Analysis.

Review of applicable documentation or test results. Verification shall be by established mathematical or technical models or simulations, algorithms, charts, graphs, circuit diagrams, or other scientific principles and procedures to provide evidence that stated requirements were met.

d. Demonstration.

Actual operation, adjustment, or re-configuration of items to provide evidence that the designed functions were accomplished.

e. Certification.

A document asserting that the item complies with the applicable requirements.

Certifications must include documented test results, performance data, analytical data or vendor documentation. The certifications must be made available to the Government representatives immediately upon request for review during inspections.

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the contract becomes the basis for the PCO’s actions.

5. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

a. Acceptable Performance.

The Government shall document positive performance. A report template is attached.

Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee payments or other actions.

b. Unacceptable Performance.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the contractor's task manager or on-site representative. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, or other actions deemed necessary by the PCO.

6. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

While the contractor is fully expected to comply with all requirements in the PWS, the Government’s assessment of contractor performance will focus mainly on the objectives listed in the AQL column of the Performance Standards Summary Matrix. The COR will monitor the contractor’s performance to ensure it meets the standards of the contract.

Unacceptable performance may result in the Contracting Officer taking any of the following actions: Require the contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements, reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services, issue a Contract Discrepancy Report, or require the contractor to re-perform the service. In addition, the contractor’s performance will be recorded annually in the Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR).