Attachment_4_DIL_QASP.PDF

W900KK-19-R-0010

04 March 2018

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

See FAR 3.104

Digital Integration Laboratory (DIL)

QUALITY ASSURANCE

SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Digital Integration Laboratory (DIL) Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

(QASP)

1. Purpose:

a. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements included in this contract. The intent is to ensure that the contractor performs in accordance with performance metrics set forth in the contract documents, that the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract, and that the Government only pays for the acceptable level of services received.

b. The contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. The role of the Government is quality assurance to ensure contract standards are achieved.

2. Background:

The DIL QASP will assist the Government in assuring that the prime contractor for this effort performs as required under the awarded contract, and that the warfighter receives the requisite quality of support they need and deserve. The QASP details how and when the Government will survey, observe, test, sample, evaluate, and document contractor performance according to the

PBWS. The Government will provide feedback to the contractor on a regular basis, but no less frequently than monthly.

3. Surveillance:

Surveillance of contractor performance is the method used by the Government to determine whether the contractor is effectively and efficiently complying with all terms and conditions of the contract. The following surveillance methods will be used:

(1) Review CDRL: Analysis of contractor quarterly management review slides for accuracy and completeness per Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), DI-MGMT-80227.

(2) Random Sampling: The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will randomly select a statistically significant sample at least 50% of the past quarters customers to validate performance requirements.

(3) Surveys: Customer Surveys will be used to capture performance data information for of the

Performance Standards identified in the QASP.

(4) Receive Certifications: DOD Information Assurance Certification & Accreditation Process

(DIACAP) and Federated and Network Site (FaNS) certificates will be reviewed yearly.

4. Metrics:

Below are metrics the Government will use to measure the quality of service in support of the

DIL tasks.

This plan will collect metrics in seven (7) areas:

Evaluation Requirement

Method of

Surveillance Frequency

Govt

Inspector Metric

Ensure Mission Command

Information Systems (MCIS) personnel operating each system as outlined in Para 4.4 of the PWS are qualified at both the operator/maintainer level and the

System Administrator level.

Ensure personnel provide support in a timely manner.

Survey Questions

1-2, 4-7 (see

Appendix B) Quarterly COR

Key

Personnel

Papers, analysis, studies, reports, meeting minutes, PMR materials, demo media and briefings are submitted in timely manner and are relevant to the DIL mission, SIMCI project and keeping abreast of MCIS requirements. Review CDRL

20 work days after submission by contractor or as needed. COR

Program

Management

Ensure sufficient qualified MCIS staff is in place to support 3 simultaneous Integration events comprised of 1 small, 1 medium, and 1 large event (small < 3

MCIS; medium 3-7 MCIS; large

>8 < 13 MCIS).

Random Sampling and Survey

Question 6-7 (see

Appendix B)

After simultaneous

Integration

Events COR Operations

The contractor is compliant with the Configuration Management

Plan (CMP) and the contractor’s own tools to manage three

Software Baselines (Legacy, Current & Emerging) of MCIS.

The contactor must demonstrate that CM tools and DIL assets support existing and emerging baselines. The contractor must maintain an accurate GFE list. Random Sampling Quarterly COR CM

Support the conduct of AIC with

MCIS integration by following

AIC processes, policies and procedures correctly for PEO

STRI systems' AIC. Random Sampling

As AIC’s are scheduled COR AIC

The contractor must support

FISMA annual review and biannual FANS Certifications for the DIL. The contractor shall ensure compliance with the ATO.

Receive

Certifications Yearly COR

IA

Certifications

The contactor shall coordinate the purchase of MCIS Hardware, Software and Licenses. The contractor shall also support integration activities at CTSF. Random Sampling As Required COR Coordination

5. Performance Reviews and Evaluations:

a. The COR will conduct quarterly performance reviews and evaluations with the contractor.

Performance standards will be evaluated using the metrics in the table above and will be reviewed as part of the quarterly management reviews. Reviews and evaluations will form the basis for determining compliance with performance objectives, measures and standards.

b. The COR will document the contractor performance for the rated period and provide a report of the results to the contractor at each quarterly review. This report will provide documentation describing how the contractor met the required standards, exceeded performance standards, as well as document deficiencies, and all customer compliments or complaints identified for each task or other service provided as applicable. At a minimum, these Contractor Performance

Reports will include a detailed description of the performance, identify the source of information, and reference the applicable QASP performance standard or contract requirement for which the enhanced performance or deficiency applies. The COR will document exceptional performance or deficiencies using the attached Contractor Performance Report (see appendix A).

6. Evaluation Criteria:

Metric Standard Rating

Key Personnel >= 95% User Satisfaction rated "Excellent" or

"Satisfactory"

Excellent

90% User Satisfaction rated "Excellent" or

"Satisfactory"

Satisfactory

< 90% User Satisfaction rated "Excellent" or

"Satisfactory"

Marginal

< 75% User Satisfaction rated "Excellent" or

"Satisfactory"

Unsatisfactory

Program

Management

Submitted > 5 business days prior to PMR Excellent

Submitted 5 business days prior to PMR Satisfactory

Submitted 4 business days prior to PMR Marginal

Submitted 3 or < business days prior to PMR Unsatisfactory

Operations Out of 3 simultaneous events, support 2 or more large events. Otherwise, support the large event with > 13

MCIS systems.

Excellent

Simultaneously support 1 small, 1 medium and 1 large event.

Satisfactory

Out of 3 simultaneous events, only able to support up to 2 medium events or 1 large and 1 small

Marginal

Out of 3 simultaneous events, able to support only small events.

Unsatisfactory

CM 100% accuracy in GFE list Excellent

95% accuracy in GFE list Satisfactory

90% accuracy in GFE list Marginal

< 90% accuracy in GFE list Unsatisfactory

AIC All AIC's are successful as the result of DIL support Excellent

AIC failure is not the direct result of DIL support or lack thereof

Satisfactory

An AIC is successful independent of DIL support Marginal

AIC failure is the direct result of DIL support or lack thereof

Unsatisfactory

IA Certs At least one certification completed 2 weeks ahead of schedule

Excellent

No break in certifications allowed Satisfactory

1 week break in certifications Marginal

>1 week break in certifications Unsatisfactory

Coordination 100% of MCIS software and licenses are available in the DIL before STRI programs require it.

Excellent

100% of MCIS software and licenses are available in the DIL when STRI programs require it.

Satisfactory

95% of MCIS software and licenses are available in the DIL when STRI programs require it.

Marginal

Less than 95% of MCIS software and licenses are available in the DIL when STRI programs require it.

Unsatisfactory

7. Documentation:

Documentation used and referenced to perform surveillance will consist of technical reports, contractor plans and procedures, customer feedback, certifications and contract data requirements. During the course of the contract, the COR retains a copy of all inspection schedules and surveillance activity logs. At the end of the surveillance period, the COR will forward these records to the Contracting Officer for inclusion into the contract file.

a. Recording Observations. The Government will use the Contractor Performance Report to record information on scheduled observations, and to denote outstanding performance and defects in performance. Each observation will be recorded by date/time received, at which time the document becomes a formal record for reference. The contractor is told each time that a defect is found. The COR makes a notation on the surveillance log of the date and time the

Surveillance Log is completed, then the COR asks the contractor task leader to initial the notation for the purpose of documenting notification.

b. Documenting Unacceptable Performance.

1) The COR will try to resolve the problem with the contractor. If the corrective action does not result in satisfactory performance, the original report identifying the discrepancy and the attempted solution, along with an evaluation of results, will be provided to the Contracting

Officer for posting in the contract file.

2) Based on the severity of the discrepancy and the success of the solution, the COR will notify the Contracting Officer. The contractor shall complete a response to the unacceptable evaluation if requested by the Contracting Officer, or by its own choice.

c. Taking Action.

1) The COR may evaluate the contractor's performance and document any non-compliance, but only the Contracting Officer may take action against the contractor for an unacceptable rating.

2) When the contractor's performance is unacceptable and a formal action is indicated, the COR will recommend appropriate corrective measures for the specific circumstances, and forward the recommendation to the Contracting Officer for consideration.

d. Potential Actions. (Per FAR 52.246-4 -- Inspection of Services -- Fixed Price)

1) If any of the services performed do not conform to contract requirements, the Government:

(a) May require the contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount.

(b) Can, when the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance:

(1) Require the contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

(2) Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.

2) If the contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or take the action necessary to ensure future performance in conformity with contract requirements, the Government may:

(a) By contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge to the contractor any cost incurred by the Government that is directly related to the performance of such service, or

(b) Terminate the contract for default.

8. Rating:

All contractor tasks will be rated as excellent, satisfactory, marginal or unsatisfactory, according to the Evaluation Criteria in Section 6 of this document. The COR will collect all necessary supporting documentation and then prepare a Contractor Performance Report to give a rating for each of the performance areas using the evaluation criteria in Section 6.

9. Analysis of Performance Review Results:

a. At the end of each performance evaluation period, the COR will evaluate all surveillance data to determine those critical performance standards that do not meet the evaluation standards of the

QASP. The COR will prepare a written report on the Offeror’s performance, for the rating period, and provide it to PCO within ten (10) working days. The PCO will issue the report to the contractor within ten working days after receipt. This report will make reference to the performance objective and standard and state how the evaluation standard was exceeded or not met. The contractor will be required to respond to the PCO within five (5) working days either accepting the report as written or providing a reclama to the performance review report.

b. The contractor may submit, for consideration, a written reclama regarding the end of period evaluation results. The purpose of the reclama is to provide a means for allowing the contractor to clarify and/or justify any extenuating circumstances, which might assist the PCO to more clearly understand issues. The contractor will only be afforded this opportunity for the initial determination. The contractor’s response shall be in writing and explain why the performance deviated, how the performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how a recurrence of the problem will be prevented in the future. The PCO will have five (5) days to review the contractor’s comments and either accept or deny the required modification.

c. If the PCO accepts the modification based on the contractor’s input, an amended performance report will be provided to the contractor reflecting any changes. The COR may issue a second report for recurring failure to meet contract performance objectives or requirements. The contractor shall respond in accordance with requirements of the second notice of failure to meet evaluation standards. Failure to respond, repeated failures to achieve evaluation standards, or failures to correct identified issues could result in grounds for cancellation of the contract for cause.

10. QASP Revisions:

Revisions to this plan are the joint responsibility of the Government and the contractor.

Appendix A

Sample Contractor Performance Report

OFFICE: PEO STRI

COR: Jeffrey Coe

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: 15 Sep 2019 through 14 Sep 2024

TASK DESCRIPTION

CLIN:

PERFORMANCE AREA: User Satisfaction

Rating ( )

Justification for Rating or comments:

Corrective action required (if any):

PERFORMANCE AREA: Management Responsiveness

PERFORMANCE AREA: Contract Mgt/Admin

PERFORMANCE AREA: Technical Performance

PERFORMANCE AREA: Reports

Appendix B

DIL CUSTOMER SUPPORT SATISFACTION SURVEY

1. How well do the technical support representatives at the DIL answer your questions?

[ ] Extremely [ ] Very [ ] Moderately [ ] Slightly or Not at All

2. How knowledgeable were the technical support representatives at the DIL?

3. How important is our service to you?

4. How helpful were the technical support representatives at the DIL?[ ] Extremely [ ] Very

[ ] Moderately [ ] Slightly or Not at All

5. How many of your issues did the DIL technical support representatives resolve?

[ ] All [ ] Most [ ] Some [ ] Few or None

6. How well do you think the DIL Team understands what you need to be successful in your integration efforts?

7. How responsive is the DIL team to your DIL Support Requests?