Att_3_SOFAST-E_II_QASP_Final_RFP.pdf

SOFAST-E II QASP

W900KK-20-R-0013

25 October 2019, Ver. 1.1

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) [SOAR (A)]

Special Operations Forces Aviation Systems Trainers – Enhancements II (SOFAST-E II)

25 October 2019

Version 1.0

Prepared by

U.S. Army PEO Simulation, Training and Instrumentation

(PEO STRI)

12211 Science Drive

Orlando, FL 32826-3276

REVISION HISTORY

This QASP is a living document and, as such, may be changed as needed based on Data Analysis

(trends), contract modifications, etc. The COR will send any recommended changes to the

Contracting Officer for approval and the Contracting Officer must approve all changes.

REV. DATE DESCRIPTION AUTHOR

1.0 10 October 2019 Original Farrell

1.1 25 October 2019 Modifications made based on SRB review Duran i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. OVERVIEW 1

2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES 1

3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 2

4. CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS. 4

5. GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE 6

6. NON-CONFORMING PERFORMANCE 7

7. DATA ANALYSIS 8

8. ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICES 8

9. COR STATUS REPORT 8

10. CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING APPLICATION (CMRA) 8

11. CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORTING SYSTEM

(CPARS) 9

12. COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (CTIP) 9

13. COR/QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE FILES 9

14. QASP CHANGES 9

15. ACRONYM LIST 10

16. ATTACHMENT 1 – SURVEILLANCE SCHEDULE 11

17. ATTACHMENT 2 – SURVEILLANCE CHECKLIST 12

ii

18. ATTACHMENT 3 – ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL) RATINGS 18

19. ATTACHMENT 4 – OVERALL RATINGS GUIDELINES 20

20. ATTACHMENT 5 – CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD 21

21. ATTACHMENT 6 – CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT 22

22. ATTACHMENT 7 – CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT LOG 23

1. OVERVIEW

1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to ensure the Contractor satisfactorily performs the contract requirements, that the Government receives quality services as defined in the

Statement of Work (SOW) and to provide a planned process for assessing the Contractor performance in a systematic manner. Performance assessment will be accomplished in accordance with this document and the terms of the contract.

This plan is a “living” document that can be revised or modified by the Government as circumstances warrant.

It is based on the premise that the Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for managing and ensuring that contract requirements are met and that quality controls meet the terms of the contract. It is not intended to provide details of how the contractor accomplishes the work.

The surveillance/evaluation methods identified in the QASP, in concert with the Contractor’s quality management and quality improvement procedures, provide a comprehensive approach to contract performance assessment.

The COR will review the QASP to ensure that it will work in concert with the Contractor’s Quality Control Plan

(QCP). In areas where gaps or increased surveillance is warranted, adjustments may be made to the QASP.

In the event of a conflict between this QASP and contractually stated inspection requirements, the Order of

Precedence (contract) shall prevail. (FAR 52.215-33)

Items that are observed IAW this QASP may be used as input for documenting contractor past performance.

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the articles, services, and documentation called for in task orders to be accomplished by the Contracting Officer or duly authorized representative.

1.2. Intent. The intent of this QASP is to:

a. Ensure Contractor performance meets or exceeds contract terms, conditions and specifications

b. Hold the Contractor accountable for quality control

c. Encourage the Contractor to take appropriate steps to control and improve quality

d. Ensure all sections of FAR 46 are applied as required and applicable

Accordingly, the Government will perform surveillance on the contract in accordance with this QASP, but reserves the right to monitor the contract in any manner necessary, at any time necessary, and at all places necessary to ensure that the services rendered conform to contract requirements. The Government also reserves the right to perform quality assurance at the Subcontractor level, and at the contractor's place of business. Sub-contract service providers shall be accountable to the Contractor who, in turn is responsible to the Government.

Resolution of non-conforming services discovered at the Subcontractor level will be addressed with the prime

Contractor. The Government will not exercise any supervisory controls over the contract service providers performing the services herein.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

2.1. Scope of Work. The base Statement of Work (SOW) establishes the SOFAST-E II technical, planning, and managerial efforts required in support of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) [SOAR(A)] at Ft. Campbell, KY. In support of 160th SOAR (A), the contractor will be required to design, build, test, modify, and field capabilities in support of the Combat Mission Simulators (CMSs) and Combat Flight Training Device

(CFTD). The support includes all peripheral equipment and capabilities that support live, virtual, and constructive training including the Mission Rehearsal Exercise Training System (MRETS), Mission Rehearsal Operations

Center (MROC), Storage Area Network (SAN), Desk Top Trainers (DTT), associated systems.

2.2. Type of Contract. This will be a Single Award ID/IQ contract vehicle type with a varying number of contract type methodologies employed (FFP and CPFF).

3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following provides a synopsis for the roles and their respective authority during the performance of the contract:

3.1. Government

3.1.1. Contracting Officer (KO). The KO is the only person authorized to direct changes in any of the requirements under this contract. In the event the Contractor effects any such change at the direction of any person other than the KO, the change will be considered to have been made without authority, and solely at the risk of the Contractor. No changes in, or deviation from the terms and conditions shall be affected, without a written modification to the contract, executed by the KO authorizing such changes.

Contracting Officer (KO) responsibilities:

• Ensure appropriate contractual remedies and solutions are applied when contractors fail to meet contract requirements.

• Ultimately responsible for final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (DFARS), DoD directives, instructions and policy letters.

3.1.2. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The COR will monitor all technical and performance aspects of the contract, and assist the (KO) in contract administration. The COR is authorized to perform the following functions:

• Assure that the Contractor performs the technical requirements of the contract

• Perform inspections necessary in connection with contract performance

• Maintain written and oral communications with the Contractor concerning technical and performance aspects of the contract

• Issue written interpretations of technical requirements, including Government drawings, designs, and specifications

• Monitor Contractor's performance and documents and notifies both the Contracting Officer and

Contractor of all deficiencies

• Coordinate availability of Government furnished property

• Provide site entry of Contractor

ACC doesn’t use other acronyms to refer to and describe a COR. Terms such as the “COTR, “Onsite COR”, “TM”, etc. will not be used. Some personnel may be assigned as Alternate CORs, but other than a statement to that effect and what actions the KO expects that ACOR to take in the absence of the primary COR, there is no difference between a COR an Alternate COR, or other government surveillance personnel assigned to conduct contract oversight. Throughout the remainder of this QASP, The term “COR’ will be used to refer to all government surveillance personnel assigned to monitor the contractor’s performance on this contract.

A letter of designation issued to the COR, a copy of which is sent to the Contractor, states the responsibilities and limitations of the COR, especially with regard to changes in cost, price, or delivery dates. The COR is not authorized to change any of the terms and conditions of the resulting order.

The Contracting Officer shall use the Joint Appointment Module (JAM) to electronically track COR nominations, appointments, terminations, and training certifications for each COR appointed to conduct oversight on this contract. The COR will upload their surveillance documents, such as COR Status Report

(SmartForm), COR trip reports, correspondence with the contractor, and other miscellaneous documents into the Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module within their online Procurement Integrated

Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Profile for this contract. The SPM and JAM are available within the PIEE suite of tools at: https://wawf.eb.mil/.

3.1.2.1 Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representative (ACOR). The Alternate COR is an employee of the

U.S. Government provided by the Requiring Activities (RA) and appointed by the Contracting Officer to provide additional surveillance personnel in monitoring and documenting the contractor’s performance. These alternate surveillance support personnel may serve as on-site representatives of the COR in performance of actual contract surveillance, if they meet all COR training and experience requirements and are appointed by the contracting officer as Alternate CORs (ACOR).

3.1.3 Contract Administrator. The official Government representative delegated authority by the Contracting

Officer to administer a contract. This individual is normally a member of the appropriate

Contracting/Procurement career field and advises on all technical contractual matters. Contract Quality

Requirements.

3.1.4. Property Administrator. An authorized representative of the Contracting Officer appointed in accordance with agency procedures responsible for administering the contract requirements and obligations relating to Government property in possession of a Contractor.

3.2. Contractor.

3.2.1. Program Manager. The Contractor responsible for running the program. May supervise the program team and manages conflicts within different departments. Plans and sets program goals and milestones and develops risk management strategies. Defines resources and schedules for the implementation of the program.

Clearly defines requirements and sets targets accordingly. Recognizes areas for internal improvement and develops plans for implementing the improvements.

3.2.2. Quality Manager. The Contractor responsible for promoting quality achievement and performance improvement throughout the organization. Develops, implements, communicates and maintains a quality plan to bring the Contractor’s Quality Systems and Policies into compliance with quality system requirements.

Directs the activities of contractor quality personnel to measure key quality characteristics of services delivered and processes from inception to completion. Establishes the standards of service for customers expected by the

Requiring Activity.

For quick access, the contact information for the performance of this QASP is provided:

https://wawf.eb.mil/

Government Personnel:

Table 1; Key Positions for Contract Administration

Title Name Phone e-mail

Contracting Officer

COR/ACOR

Contract Administrator

Property Administrator

Contractor Personnel:

Title Name Phone e-mail

Contract Manager

Project Manager

Quality Manager

4. CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.

4.1. Contractor’s Quality Control Plan/Program (QCP). The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the

Contractor’s Quality Control Plan (QCP) performance under this contract in accordance with this QASP.

The Contractor’s quality control program is the means by which he assures himself that all work complies with the requirement of the contract PWS. It is essential that Government Surveillance Personnel understand that

Quality Control (QC) is the responsibility of the contractor, and not the government.

As such, the government will focus their efforts on validating if the contractor is maintaining an adequate quality control inspection systems that ensures the contractor maintains evidence that services provided conform to contract quality requirements. The Contractor shall provide inspection data to the Government on request for validation.

The Contractor’s QCP shall include a process that can identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective services.

4.2. Government Quality Assurance. This QASP describes what the Government will do to ensure that the

Contractor has performed in accordance with the performance standards within the PWS.

This QASP describes:

• How the performance standards will be applied:

o The Performance Standard for each requirement in the PWS will be applied as prescribed in the

PWS. Ensure that each Performance requirement within the PWS includes a Measurable performance standard in terms of quality, timeliness, or quantity.

o Ensure the method of assessing contractor performance against performance standards is included in this QASP o Ensure each Performance Requirement includes an acceptable quality limit (AQL). AQL is the worst tolerable performance that is still considered acceptable.

• Which performance elements will be surveilled (Surveillance Checklist, Attachment 2) o All performance activities will be surveilled through-out the Period of Performance, using a risk based approach. The selected items will be populated on the Monthly Checklist and placed on the

Surveillance Schedule for each period surveilled.

• When the surveillance will be scheduled (Surveillance Schedule, Attachment 1) o Selected items for each month will be placed on the Surveillance Checklist and scheduled surveillance on the Monthly Schedule. Surveillance may be scheduled on a daily, weekly or monthly frequency. However, each contractor requirement must be audited for compliance prior to invoice payment being made.

• The Acceptable Quality Limit (AQL) o The AQL will be determined by the Requiring Activity, i.e., the COR., and referenced in Attachment

3.

• The nature of Government contract quality assurance actions that include the number of observations made and the number and type of defects (defect rate)

Personnel conducting contractor performance surveillance will use Attachment 2, Surveillance

Checklist, or equivalent to answer the Performance question asked, and provide comments in the area provided on the checklist. These comments and metrics from the Checklist will be included on each

MSR submitted during the Period of Performance.

5.1. Methods of Surveillance. The following Methods of Surveillance may be utilized in monitoring the

Contractors’ performance:

• 100% Inspection will be reserved for the highest risk areas where consequence of failure may affect life or limb, or there is likelihood of mission failure

• Random Sampling Will be used when a service is performed on a frequent basis and a statistically valid sample can be selected for audit. This is most appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks

• Periodic Inspection Will be used when planned sampling of a service is at a specific predetermined date and time. This is most appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently, yet on a scheduled basis

• Customer Feedback. The COR may receive customer input about the quality of services performed under the contract. These inputs maximize the Government’s resource potential and are considered in regular assessments as they may identify contractor process improvement opportunities or required corrective actions; however, unsolicited input must be validated.

The Customer Complaint Record, DA Form 5477, Attachment 5, will be available to document/record complaints. See DA PAM 5-20 for detailed instructions. The COR will collect the Customer

Complaints and investigate for validity ASAP.

The following procedures will be followed when a complaint is received.

1. The COR/ACOR will investigate to determine the validity of the complaint

2. If the complaint is determined to be invalid, the COR will inform the person who submitted the complaint of the reason(s) as soon as practical

3. For validated complaints that are true contractual non-conformances, the procedures in paragraph 6 below will be applied

4. A Customer Complaint Log will be used to document each validated customer complaint and attached to the Status Report (SmartForm) in the Surveillance and Performance Monitoring

(SPM) module.

5. GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE

5.1. Methods of Surveillance. The following Methods of Surveillance may be utilized in monitoring the

Contractors’ performance monthly:

• 100% Inspection will be reserved for the highest risk areas where consequence of failure may affect life or limb, or there is likelihood of mission failure

• Random Sampling Will be used when a service is performed on a frequent basis and a statistically valid sample can be selected for audit. This is most appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks

• Periodic Inspection Will be used when planned sampling of a service is at a specific predetermined date and time. This is most appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently, yet on a scheduled basis

• Customer Feedback. Not a valid method of surveillance, but a good indicator of areas where surveillance should be conducted or intensified.

The Customer Complaint Record, Attachment 2, will be placed at convenient locations for the end user of these services, and made available to document/record all complaints. The COR will collect the

Customer Complaints each surveillance cycle and investigate for validity ASAP.

The following procedures will be followed when a complaint is received.

1. The COR/ACOR will investigate to determine the validity of the complaint

2. If the complaint is determined to be invalid, the COR will inform the person who submitted the complaint of the reason(s) as soon as practical

3. For validated complaints that are true contractual non-conformances, the procedures in paragraph 6 below will be applied

4. A Customer Complaint Log will be used to document each validated customer complaint and attached to the COR Monthly Surveillance Report in the SPM module

5.1.1 Surveillance Procedure: The COR will evaluate the Contractor’s performance monthly against

Performance Standards established in the contract. Evaluations will be to the extent practical to assure the contractor provides quality services IAW the requirements of the contract.

1. The COR will utilize the attached checklist(s) to track and document surveillance.

2. The COR will perform an analysis of Customer feedback and the contractors actions to identify performance trends and to ensure valid customer concerns are resolved timely.

3. The COR will review the contractors supplied reports that are to include but not limited monthly

CDRLs and key milestones and progress for the current period and planned for the next period and validate the data accuracy supplied within.

5.2. Surveillance Schedule. (Required) A Surveillance Schedule (Attachment 1) will be created each month.

Locally generated equivalent is acceptable. The schedule is “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY” and is not releasable to anyone other than authorized Government personnel. Each Month’s Surveillance Schedule will be completed at the beginning of each month during the Period of Performance (PoP) to schedule the upcoming month surveillance activity. Completed Surveillance Schedules will be filed in the online Surveillance and

Performance Monitoring (SPM) module located within (https://wawf.eb.mil) file for this contract, either as an attachment to Monthly COR Status Report (MSR) or uploaded separately in the Miscellaneous Documents

Section.

5.3. Surveillance Checklists. (If Applicable) A Surveillance Checklist (Attachment 2) will be created each month. Locally generated equivalent is acceptable. The Checklist is “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY” and is not releasable to anyone other than authorized Government personnel. Each Month’s Surveillance Checklist will be completed with the Surveillance Schedule. Completed Surveillance Checklist will be filed in the online

Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module located within (https://wawf.eb.mil) file for this contract, either as an attachment to Monthly COR Status Report (MSR) or uploaded separately in the

Miscellaneous Documents Section.

Note: Surveillance Schedules and Checklists are considered COR documentation and must be uploaded in the

SPM module

5.4. Surveillance Documentation. Each months’ Completed Surveillance Documentation, to include the COR

Status Report must be filed in the online Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module located within (https://wawf.eb.mil) file for this contract. The COR Status Report (Smart Form) must be utilized, supporting documentation can be uploaded as an attachment.

6. NON-CONFORMING PERFORMANCE

A Non-conformance occurs when the Contractor fails to meet the terms, conditions and/or specifications of the

Contract/Task Order. All instances of non-conformance must be documented by the COR. The COR will provide the details of the non-conformance using the Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), DA FORM 5479, Attachment 6 to the KO, who will notify the Contractor of each nonconformance occurrence, unless the KO has authorized the COR to submit directly to the contractor, and copy the KO. Resolution of any non-conformance discovered at the Subcontractor level will be addressed with the prime Contractor.

Non-conformances are classified as either: Level I (Minor); Level II (Major); or Level III (Critical).

6.1. Level I (Minor). Level I non-conformance is not likely to materially reduce the usability of services for their intended purpose or is a departure from established standards having little bearing on completing the contract requirement. Minor non-conformances can usually be corrected on the spot and can be issued to the

Contractor through either a verbal or written Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR). However, the Government is required to document verbal Level I CDRs. The COR may issue verbal Level I CDRs directly to the appropriate level of Contractor management. The COR will notify the KO as soon as practical when a verbal

Level I CDR is issued and document them in their Monthly Reports. If the non-conformance cannot be corrected on the spot, the Contractor shall be given a suspense date to correct the deficiency. The KO will issue and sign written Level I CDRs, Attachment 6.

6.2. Level II (Major). Level II non-conformance is likely to result in failure of the services to meet contract requirements. Also, repeated discrepancies, a large number of documented Level I CDRs and trends indicating failure of the Contractor’s quality control program can be classified as Level II CDRs. The KO issues all Level

II CDRs in writing, Attachment 6. The COR will notify the KO as soon as practical when a major non-conformance is identified.

6.3. Level III (Critical). Level III non-conformances result in hazardous or unsafe conditions due to the manner in which the services are performed; prevent or impact a vital agency mission as a result of performance; or are for repeated or uncorrected Level II CDRs. The Contracting Office Director or Deputy

Director issues written Level III CDRs. The COR is responsible for notifying the KO immediately upon discovery of a critical non-conformance.

6.4. Documenting CDRs. The COR will provide the details of the non-conformance using the CDR, Attachment 6. If the Requiring activity prefers to issue a locally developed CDR, documentation must include as a minimum: the Contract or Task Order number; reference to the specific contract requirement; the specific discrepancy to the requirement; where it was discovered; the date and time it was discovered; Contractor representative who was notified; and the suspense date for Contractor response/corrective action.

6.5. Tracking and Resolving CDRs. All CDRs, verbal and written, regardless of issuer will be included in the

COR’s Monthly Report. The COR and KO shall track CDRs to ensure the Contractor identifies and takes appropriate corrective action to the root cause and the specific non-conformance is corrected within the required timeline. The KO will make a final written determination of the Government’s remedies if the non-conformance is not corrected by the Contractor after receiving notice and a reasonable opportunity to correct the work.

7. DATA ANALYSIS

Data Analysis will be performed to identify trends in cost, schedule and/or performance risks. The results of

Data Analysis will be documented in COR Status Report (SmartForm) and may be used to make adjustments to surveillance schedules and/or checklist items to increase or decrease surveillance, based on performance trends.

Negative trends noted using Government data/observations could result in issuing the Contractor

Nonconformance Report. Trends noted using Contractor data will not result in a CNR unless the Contractor has not addressed the negative trend. QASP changes based on Data Analysis will be coordinated with the

Contracting Officer for approval.

8. ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICES

When all services have been deemed acceptable and there is documented, objective, quality evidence to support acceptable performance, the COR will accept the services provided and authorize payment to the Contractor.

Acceptance and payment will be made by approving the Contractor’s Receiving Reports in Wide Area

Workflow at https://wawf.eb.mil/ as an iRAPT Inspector, and/or Acceptor.

9. COR STATUS REPORT

COR Status Reports, or Monthly Status Reports (MSR) will be submitted on a monthly basis to the Contracting

Officer via the Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module. MSR reports must be uploaded into the Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module using the “Smart Form” Monthly Surveillance

Report. MSR reports will be due NLT the 10th day of the month following the month of surveillance. COR

Status Reports will provide a synopsis of the Contractors performance for the inclusive dates of the report. The synopsis must contain a summary of surveillances performed, Customer Feedback if any, CNRs if any, an analysis of the Contractors performance, recommended adjustments to surveillance schedules, and any other pertinent contract information IAW FAR 46.104, and the COR Appointment Letter. Completed Surveillance

Checklists and CNRs, if any, will be included as attachments to COR Status Reports, or referenced in the MSR for that month and uploaded separately in the Miscellaneous Documents Section within the Surveillance and

Performance Monitoring (SPM) module. See para 4.2.

10. CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING APPLICATION (CMRA)

Reporting Labor Hours. The Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) operates and maintains a secure Army data collection site where the Contractor shall report all Contractor manpower (including subcontractor manpower) required for performance of this contract. The Contractor shall completely fill in all the information in the format using the following web address: https://www.ecmra.mil.

https://www.ecmra.mil/

The required information includes the following:

a. Contracting Officer (KO), Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) name;

b. Contract number, including task and delivery order number;

c. Beginning and ending dates covered by reporting period;

d. Contractor's name, address, phone number, e-mail address, identity of Contractor employee entering data;

e. Estimated direct labor hours (including sub-Contractors);

f. Estimated direct labor dollars paid this reporting period (including sub-Contractors);

g. Total payments (including sub-Contractors);

h. Predominant Federal Service Code (FSC) reflecting services provided by Contractor (and separate predominant FSC for each sub-Contractor if different);

i. Estimated data collection cost;

j. Organizational title associated with the Unit Identification Code (UIC) for the Army Requiring Activity (the

Army Requiring Activity is responsible for providing the Contractor with its UIC for the purposes of reporting this information);

k. Locations where Contractor and sub-Contractors perform the work (specified by zip code in the United States and nearest city, country, when in an overseas location, using standardized nomenclature provided on website);

l. Presence of deployment or contingency contract language; and Number of Contractor and sub-Contractor employees deployed in theater this reporting period (by country).

While inputs may be reported any time during the FY, The COR shall ensure the contractor submits all data shall no later than October 31 of each calendar year. The COR shall verify that the Contactor has complied with the required contractor manpower reporting annually and document the results in the CORs’ Online

Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module, CMRA section. Contracting officers shall ensure that the requirement to report contractor manpower is included in all contracts, task/delivery orders and modifications.

11. CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORTING SYSTEM (CPARS)

Documented surveillance data (COR Status Reports, Completed Surveillance Checklists, Customer Feedback and CDRs, if any) will be used to support CPARS ratings. CPARS will be completed in accordance with

AFARS, Subpart 5142.15 – Contractor Performance Information.

12. COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (CTIP)

In accordance with PGI 222.17 and FAR 52.222-50, the KO will be notified immediately of any information from any source that alleges a Contractor employee, subcontractor and/or subcontractor employee has engaged in conduct that violates the United States Government “zero” tolerance policy regarding trafficking in persons.

13. COR/QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE FILES

The official COR/Quality Assurance Surveillance Files will be maintained in the on-line Joint Appointment

Module (JAM) and Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module IAW DoDI 5000.72, and DFARS

PGI 201.602-2.

14. QASP CHANGES

This QASP is a living document and, as such, may be changed as needed based on Data Analysis (trends), contract modifications by the KO, etc. The COR will send any recommended changes to the Contracting

Officer for approval and the Contracting Officer must approve all changes.

COR’S Signature Block Date

Contracting Officer’s Signature Block Date

15. ACRONYM LIST

ADR Alternate Disputes Resolution

AQL Acceptable Quality Level

CDR Contract Discrepancy Report

CDRL Contract Data Requirements List

CET Contractual Engineering Task

CO Contracting Officer

COR Contracting Officer’s Representative

CPARS Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

IAW In Accordance With

PC Production Control

PEO STRI Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation

PM STS Product Manager SOF Training Systems

PM Program Manager

POC Point of Contact

QA Quality Assurance

QAP Quality Assurance Plan

QAR Quality Assurance Representative

QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

QC/QA Quality Control/Quality Assurance

TADSS Training Aids, Devices, Simulators, and Simulations

TEAM TADSS Engineering and Maintenance

SS Services Summary

16. ATTACHMENT 1 – SURVEILLANCE SCHEDULE

17. ATTACHMENT 2 – SURVEILLANCE CHECKLIST

1. CONTRACTOR: TBD

2. COR/Program Manager: TBD/TBD

3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: September 2025

4. CONTRACT NO / SERVICE: W900KK-20-R-0013

5. CONTRACT DESCRIPTION:

SUPPORT TRAINING OPERATIONS TO INCLUDE,

CONCURRENCY AND FUNCTIONALITY ENHANCEMENTS TO

THE SUITE OF CMS, CFTD, AND RELATED DEVICES

If an Element does not apply, an N/A rating will be given and the standard is not factored into the evaluation.

Element #

Base SOW

Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)

Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

1) Overall

Rating

Products or services are unacceptable.

They do not meet

SOW

requirements.

Product or service requires correction with significant

Government involvement.

Meets SOW requirements after

Government intervention and guidance.

Product or service meets all SOW requirements.

There are only minor corrective actions required and minimal

Government intervention.

Product or service exceeds all SOW requirements.

There are only minor corrective actions required and are resolved with no

Government intervention.

Product or service exceeds all SOW requirements.

Highly effective corrective actions.

Improved performance and quality.

Satisfacto ry

Monitor issues thru meetings, Management

Information

Systems, Testing, Customer feedback and via CDRLs.

Narrative:

If an Element does not apply, an N/A rating will be given and the standard is not factored into the evaluation.

Element #

Base SOW

Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)

Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

2)

3.2.2.1

Contractor’ s Progress, Status and

Manageme nt Report

(CPSMR)

Contractor successfully reported less than

90% of the management, technical, logistics and administrative program status

IAW the IMP and

IMS. The contractor has not identified faults and initiated corrective actions.

Content missing from CDRL or not addressed.

N/A

Contractor successfully reported 90% of the management, technical, logistics and administrative program status

IAW the IMP and

IMS on time.

CPSMR content is acceptable. The contractor has identified faults and initiated corrective actions.

Contractor successfully reported 100% of the management, technical, logistics and administrative program status

IAW the IMP, and

IMS on time.

CPSMR content is complete and accurate per the

DID.

Contractor successfully reported 100% of the management, technical, logistics and administrative program status

IAW the IMP, and

IMS on time.

CPSMR content is complete and accurate per the

DID with recommendations for solutions beyond the scope of the contract.

Satisfacto ry

Monthly CPSMR report reviews. IPT meeting information.

TEAM meeting discussions.

If an Element does not apply, an N/A rating will be given and the standard is not factored into the evaluation.

Element #

Base SOW

Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)

Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

3)

3.2.2.2

Integrated

Master

Schedule

(IMS)

Contractor successfully developed, implemented, managed and updated less than

75% of scheduled

SOFAST-E II

tasks on the IMS.

The contractor has not identified program activity(s) issues nor initiated corrective actions.

Contractor successfully developed, implemented, managed and updated 75% of scheduled

SOFAST-E II

tasks on the IMS.

The contractor has not identified program activity(s) issues and initiated corrective actions.

Contractor successfully developed, implemented, managed and updated 80% of scheduled

SOFAST-E II

tasks on the IMS.

The contractor has identified program activity(s) issues and initiated corrective actions.

Contractor successfully developed, implemented, managed and updated 90% of scheduled

SOFAST-E II

tasks on the IMS.

The contractor has identified program activity(s) issues and initiated corrective actions.

Contractor successfully developed, implemented, managed and updated 95% or more of scheduled

SOFAST-E II

tasks on the IMS.

Satisfacto ry

Surveillance of

Contractor’s

CDRLs. DD 1423

MONTHLY/AS

REQUIRED

Narrative:

4)

3.2.2.4

Financial

Management

Invoices/vouchers are not submitted timely and/or with more than two errors.

Invoices/vouchers are submitted timely with more than two errors on any one invoice/voucher.

Invoices/vouchers are submitted timely with no more than any one error on any one invoice/voucher.

Invoices/vouchers are submitted timely with no errors on all invoice/vouchers

Submitted.

Invoices/Vouchers are submitted timely, error free and in conjunction with monthly progress reports.

Satisfacto ry

COR review of

CDRLs, invoices/vouchers posted on WAWF

NOTE; Timely defined as within 30 days of invoice event i.e. CDRL acceptance, etc.

If an Element does not apply, an N/A rating will be given and the standard is not factored into the evaluation.

Element #

Base SOW

Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)

Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

5) 3.1

Program

Communicatio ns

Not responsive

(within one business day, more than 3 times in one month) to

Government requests (written or verbal communications, and data calls).

Not responsive

(within one business day, no more than 3 times per month) to

Government requests (written or verbal communications, and data calls).

Responds to

Government requests within one business day.

Responds to

Government requests within one business day with no oversight.

Anticipates, identifies and recommends changes in technical and contractual matters.

Responds to and exceeds

Government requests within one business day with no oversight.

Anticipates, identifies and recommends changes in technical and contractual matters.

Satisfacto ry

Surveillance during meetings;

correspondence with the PM office.

SOW Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

6) 3.3

CDRL

Delivery

One or more

CDRLs delivered more than 3 days late.

One or more

CDRLs delivered

2 days late.

All CDRLs meet delivery schedule with no CDRL delivered more than 1 day late.

All CDRLs meet delivery schedule.

Some early deliveries to the

Government's benefit.

All CDRLs meet all requirements with one or more

CDRLs exceeding requirements to the

Government’s benefit.

Satisfactor y

Surveillance of

Contractor’s

CDRLs. DD 1423

MONTHLY/AS

REQUIRED

SOW Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

7) 3.2.2.7

Configurati on

Managemen t

Meets less than

80% of section

3.1.3 requirements and does not flow down and ensure responsibility for

CM performance to sub-Contractors and/or does not communicate configuration changes to stakeholders.

N/A

Meets 80-90% of section 3.1.3 requirements and flows down and ensure responsibility for

CM performance to sub-Contractors and/or does communicate configuration changes to stakeholders.

Meets more than

90% of section

3.1.3 requirements and flows down and ensure responsibility for

CM performance to sub-Contractors and/or does communicate configuration changes to stakeholders.

Meets or exceeds all of section 3.1.3 requirements.

Satisfactor y

SOFAST-E II

reviews. IPT meeting information.

TADSS

availability.

8) Spare

Satisfactor y

9) Spare

N/A

Satisfactor y

SOW Para.

Title

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Assigned

Rating

Surveillance

Method Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Exceptional

Use this area to address any additional narrative, concerns, or items of note:

18. ATTACHMENT 3 – ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL) RATINGS

FAR Subpart 42.1503, Table 42-1, Evaluation Rating Definitions

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.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an

Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

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.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

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.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

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.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A

Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

FAR Subpart 42.1503, Table 42-1, Evaluation Rating Definitions

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.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government.

A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An

Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

19. ATTACHMENT 4 – OVERALL RATINGS GUIDELINES

Provided for information only; Overall Rating will be calculated based on QASP input and determined based on guidance below.

Exceptional - to receive an "overall" rating of Exceptional, must receive Exceptional in at least two of the elements without receiving lower than a satisfactory rating in any element.

Very Good - to receive an "overall" rating of Very Good, must receive Very Good in at least two of the elements without receiving lower than a satisfactory rating in any element.

Satisfactory - to receive an "overall" rating of Satisfactory must receive Satisfactory or higher and no more than one marginal ratings and no unsatisfactory ratings.

Marginal – Two or more Marginal ratings and no Unsatisfactory rating will result in an "overall" rating of

Marginal.

Unsatisfactory – One or more Unsatisfactory rating will result in an “overall” rating of Unsatisfactory.

20. ATTACHMENT 5 – CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

21. ATTACHMENT 6 – CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT

22. ATTACHMENT 7 – CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT LOG

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT LOG

CONTRACTOR: xxx

CONTRACT NUMBER: xxx

CDR

Number

CDR

Level

Date

Issued

Due

Date

Date

Response

Received

Date of

Follow-

Up

Date

Close d

Description of Deficiency