ATTACHMENT_09_SCETI_ACE_QASP_FINAL.PDF

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Version 1.0, 22 April 2019

For

MODERNIZING INSTRUMENTATION SOLUTIONS FOR TEST AND EVALUATION

(MISTE)

Delivery Order System of Systems Controlled Environment Test Infrastructure (SCETI)

Atmospheric Conditions Enhancement (ACE)

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.

The following FAR clause applies based on contract type:

52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed Price 52.246-5 Inspection of Services – Cost Reimbursement 52.246-6 Inspection – Time and Material and Labor Hour

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

a. Procuring 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.

Assigned PCO: Daniel Veenstra Organization or Agency: U.S. Army Contracting Command-Orlando Telephone: (407) 208-3308 Email: daniel.l.veenstra.civ@mail.mil

b. Contract Specialist (CS) - The CS acts as an acquisition consultant and serves as liaison between the requesting program office, the contractor, and the supporting contracting office.

Assigned CS: Joe Candelaria Organization or Agency: U.S. Army Contracting Command-Orlando Telephone: 407-208-3220 Email: joseph.candelaria5.civ@mail.mil

c. 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.

Assigned COR: Juan B. Orozco Organization or Agency: PEO STRI, PM ITTS-IMO Telephone: 407-384-5370 Email: juan.b.orozco.civ@mail.mil

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES.

To be determined.

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards.

The Statement of Work (SOW) (SOW-2018-018), dated 15 April 2019 delineates the tasks required by the Government. These tasks shall be subject to the following performance standards listed in the table below.

Table 4-1: Acceptable Quality Levels (AQL)

Product/Service

Requirement – SOO Reference

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Method of Surveillance

Remediation/Disposition

1. Program Management 3.1

100% accuracy presented in contract performance and risk management status.

>98% accuracy in reporting that demonstrates program outcomes are being properly managed and controlled.

Effectiveness of Program Management Function is validated through survey methods, performance monitoring and communication and feedback.

Methods: A, C, D, E

[I] Standard consistently met is viewed favorably toward Government consideration of Option Exercise. When consistently high levels are maintained annually, annual CPARS Management or Business Relations factor rating of Very Good or Exceptional.

[D] Negative satisfaction levels viewed unfavorably toward Government consideration of Option exercise. Corrective Action Plan (CAP) required.

Annual CPARS Management or Business Relations factor rating could be rated no higher than Marginal if CAP unsuccessful.

2.Contractor maintains adherence to

IIMS SOW 3.1.1

Manage and track schedule status and accomplish all IMS milestones on schedule

100% schedule adherence demonstrated on the DO

IMS tracking through monthly reports and status reviews.

Methods: A, B, D, E

[I] Contractor compliant with DO requirement and demonstrated good schedule control viewed favorably toward Government consideration of Option Exercise.

[D] Loss of schedule control and/or high variation is risk indicator requiring a CAP if schedule risk is imminent.

Consistently poor performance results in annotated CPARS narrative for Schedule/Timeliness and may result in rating of no higher than marginal if schedule product delivery date not met.

SOO Reference

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Method of Surveillance

Remediation/Disposition

3. Financial Management System Cost and Schedule Performance tracked against EVM reporting

SOW 3.1.2

Strict adherence to negotiated contract cost and performance schedules.

> 95% cost control demonstrated on CPFF DO

100% schedule adherence demonstrated on the DO

Monthly Trend Analysis of EVMS data and other cost and schedule reporting requirements when EVM is applied.

Methods: A, D, F

[I] Consistently positive SPI (> 1) and CPI (> 1) indicators viewed favorably toward Government consideration of Option Exercise. When consistently met or exceeded, annual CPARS Cost Control and/or Schedule/ Timeliness factor rating of Very Good or Exceptional for CPFF DO’s.

[D] Consistent or significant negative SPI (<

1) and CPI (<1) indicators viewed unfavorably toward Government consideration of Option exercise. CAP required and annual CPARS Cost Control and/or Schedule/ Timeliness factor rating no higher than Marginal.

4. Customer Satisfaction

No customer complaints with high levels of satisfaction reported.

Contractor has established positive working relationship with Government customer that is maintained.

A Corrective Action Plan (CAP) has been approved to the Government’s satisfaction within 15 calendar days after notification.

Results of ongoing dialog and satisfaction survey results.

Methods: A, D

[I] Consistently high levels of satisfaction viewed favorably toward Government consideration of Option exercise. When consistently high levels are maintained annually, CPARS Management or Business Relations factor rating of Very Good or Exceptional.

[D] Negative satisfaction levels viewed unfavorably toward Government consideration of Option exercise. CAP required.

Annual CPARS Management or Business Relations factor rating could be rated no higher than Marginal if CAP unsuccessful.

SOO Reference

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Method of Surveillance

Remediation/Disposition

5. Program Management Reviews SOW 3.1.6.2

100% accuracy presented in contract performance and risk management status.

>98% accuracy in reporting that demonstrates program outcomes are being properly managed and controlled.

Effectiveness of Program Management Function is validated through survey methods, performance monitoring and communication and feedback.

Methods: A, B, D, E

Every 4 months

[I] Standard consistently met is viewed favorably toward Government consideration of Option Exercise. When consistently high levels are maintained annually, annual CPARS Management or Business Relations factor rating of Very Good or Exceptional.

[D] Negative satisfaction levels viewed unfavorably toward Government consideration of Option exercise. CAP required.

Annual CPARS Management or Business Relations factor rating could be rated no higher than Marginal if CAP unsuccessful.

6. Access and General Protection Policy and Procedures

SOW 3.1.7

Manage project to ensure 100% employee compliance

>98% accuracy in reporting that demonstrates employee data is being properly managed and controlled.

Methods: A, E,

7. Anti-Terrorism (AT) Level 1 Training

SOW 3.1.8

Manage project to ensure 100% employee compliance

>98% accuracy in reporting that demonstrates employee data is being properly

SOO Reference

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL)

Method of Surveillance

Remediation/Disposition

8. iWatch Training

SOW 3.1.9

Manage project to ensure 100% employee compliance

>98% accuracy in reporting that demonstrates employee data is being properly

9. Operational Security

(OPSEC)

Awareness Training SOW 3.1.11

Manage project to ensure 100% employee compliance

>98% accuracy in reporting that demonstrates employee data is being properly

Notes:

a. Frequency can be adjusted to bi-weekly dependent on contractor performance to ensure risk is adequately managed and mitigated.

b. The Government technical team consists of subject matter expertise from Redstone Test Center, Huntsville, AL and PM ITTS Instrumentation Management Office (IMO).

c. Methods of Surveillance are explained in Section 5 below.

5. METHODS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE.

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR, with assistance from the Contract Specialist, shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard.

A. Direct Observation. (Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.)

B. Management Information Systems (MIS). (Evaluates outputs through the use of management information reports. Best used for general surveillance and may need to be supplemented by periodic inspections.)

C. Periodic Inspection.

D. Progress or status meetings.

E. Analysis of contractor's progress reports. (Evaluate cost, schedule, etc.)

F. Performance reporting. (Evaluate metrics for a specific time period. Develop metrics or use metrics found in MIS.)

6. RATINGS.

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome.

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. Additionally, surveillance results may be used to prepare Performance Assessment Reports through the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Performance will be documented using the Department of Defense standards for Performance Assessments. The standards, with their definitions, are as follows:

Table 6-1 Overall Performance Ratings

Overall Performance

Rating

Standard

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated 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 contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element 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 contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only 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 of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

7. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

a. Acceptable Performance.

The Government shall document positive performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract fee payments or other actions.

Additionally, surveillance results may be used to prepare Performance Assessment Reports in CPARS.

b. Unacceptable Performance.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor and PCO.

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 Nonconformance Report (NCR), and present it to the contractor’s task manager or on-site representative. A NCR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the NCR in writing. The NCR 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 NCR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present his corrective action plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor’s corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any NCRs may become a part of supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, or other actions deemed necessary by the PCO and as documented in the contract.

8. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

a. Frequency of Measurement.

During contract/order performance, the COR shall take periodic measurements as specified in the Frequency column of the Performance Standards Summary Matrix, and shall analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

At a minimum, the COR shall meet with the contractor on a bi-weekly basis via teleconference sessions and quarterly at the contractor’s facility to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment. Appendix B and C provide sample report formats.

Prepared by:

Juan Orozco Contracting Officer’s Representative

Appendix A Acronyms and Definitions

Acronyms/Terms Definition

AT Anti-Terrorism

COR Contracting Officer’s Representative

CPARS Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System

IMO Instrumentation Management Office

IT Information Technology

PCO Procuring Contracting Officer

MIS Management Information System

NCR Nonconformance Report

SOW Statement of Work

QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Appendix B Performance Report

1) CONTRACT NUMBER:

2) Prepared by: (Name of COR) [Insert Name]

3) Date and time of observation:

4) Description of Observation:

Examples of items to include in a report are:

Method of surveillance:

How frequently you conducted surveillance:

Surveillance Results:

Number of Observations:

Prepared by: [Enter COR’s name]

Signature of Contracting Officer’s Representative Date

Appendix C Nonconformance Report (NCR)

1) CONTRACT NUMBER:

2) TO: (Contractor Task Manger or on-site representative) [Insert Name]

3) FROM: Prepared by: [Enter COR’s name]

4) Date and time of observation:

5) Description of discrepancy or problem: [Describe in detail Identify any attachments, engineering reports or contractor provided specification sheets]

6) Corrective action plan:

[COR’s and Government team’s assessment if a written corrective action plan< is / is not> required]

[If a written corrective action plan is required include the following. > The written Corrective Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than <# of days after receipt of COR notification]

Prepared by: [Enter COR’s name]

Signature Contracting Officer’s Representative Date

Received by:

Signature Contractor Task Manger or on-site representative Date

The COR may initiate a NCR at any time contractor performance is determined to be impacting cost, schedule or performance standards.