QASP_-_Quality_Assurance_Surveillance_Plan.pdf

(QASP) FIRE SUPPRSSION SERVICES

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FIRE SUPPRESSION SERVICES

As of 7 February 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

4.2 Customer Feedback

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

5.2 Monitoring Forms

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.2 Reporting

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This QASP is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled FIRE SUPPRESSION SERVICES, FT HUACHUCA, AZ. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Directorate of Public Works (DPW) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the DPW to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor shall upon request provide to the Government their quality control documentation.

QCP is to be delivered electronically within 10 days after contract award. Electronic copies of a comprehensive written QCP shall be submitted to the KO and COR within 5 working days when changes are made thereafter. After acceptance of the quality control plan the contractor shall receive the Contracting Officer’s acceptance in writing of any proposed change to their QC system. This QASP enables the government to monitor the contractor’s QCP.

1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (KO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the contracting officer's representative (COR), quality assurance representative (QAR), and the contractor.

The KO will designate one full-time COR as the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the

KO.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The COR is designated in writing by the KO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the KO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract.

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY

LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the PWS and in Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary (PRS). If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, contractor shall be compensated per the terms of the contract. Failure to meet the required service or performance level shall result in a deduction per PRS.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques.

4.1.1 Random sampling shall occur either by COR or QA during or after performance of work to ensure compliance with contract requirements.

4.1.2 Customer Complaints

4.1.3 100% inspection of required contractor documentation shall be performed by the COR as required.

4.2 Customer Feedback

4.2.1 The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction.

Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

4.2.2 Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the KO or the COR, as opposed to the contractor.

4.2.3 Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate.

4.2.4 Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in the PRS are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. For certain critical activities such as those involving Fire Suppression Services the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance at all locations listed on the building schedule.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes.

Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

5.2.1 The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by COR or QAR will be reported using the monitoring form in Attachment 2 below. The form, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved.

5.2.2 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.1.1 Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, they may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date they intend to bring performance up to the required levels.

6.2 Reporting

6.2.1 COR will prepare/submit bi-annual report to the KO and contractor summarizing the overall results of the quality of the contractor’s performance during that particular service. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

6.3.1 The KO may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the COR, QAR, and/or other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation.

The KO may also define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the KO and COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Performance assessment data and trend analysis

Issues and concerns of both parties

Projected outlook for upcoming services and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

6.3.2 The KO and COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

6.3.3 The KO, COR, and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action.

Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented.

Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the CO.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Required Services (Tasks)

Performance Standards

Acceptable Quality Levels

Methods of

Surveillance

Deduction Schedule for Non-Compliance

Schedule Service (C.4. and C.5. of

PWS)

Perform Emergency Repairs (C.6. of PWS)

Inspect System (C.11.1. of PWS)

Correct Deficiencies (C.11.2. of PWS)

Maintenance (C.11.3. of PWS)

Hydrostatic Testing (C.11.4. of PWS)

Clean Work Area (C.11.6 of PWS)

Enforce SAFETY (C.11.9. of PWS)

Services scheduled IAW established frequencies and deadlines

Repairs completed IAW established frequencies and deadlines

Fire suppression systems fully charged, operational and safe with certifications that are current

Deficiencies corrected immediately and reported to COR

Maintenance performed IAW manufacturer specifications

Testing completed IAW manufacturer specifications

Work area is cleaned prior to departure to allow normal kitchen operations

Provide safe workplace for employees, customers and general public

90%

95%

97%

Observed schedule

Random visual inspection, customer complaints inspection complaints

5% of affected CLINs below AQL or total price of affected CLINs for no service

1% of annual contract cost for each infraction

5% of affected CLINs below AQL or total price of affected CLINs for no service

1% of annual contract

5% of affected CLINs below AQL or total price of affected CLINs for no service

1% of annual contract

ATTACHMENT 2: QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM

CHECK LIST FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM

CONTRACT NUMBER: _____________________ CONTRACTOR: _________________________

BUILDING NUMBER: _________________ NAME: _________________ CLIN: _______________

SURVEY DATE:__________________SURVEILLANCE METHOD:_________________________

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD:__________%

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

REQUIRMENTS:

A. Contractor arrived at scheduled location on time. YES______NO_______

B. Performed emergency repairs as required. YES______NO_______N/A_______

C. Inspected and certified each component, system returned to operational state, and properly tagged. YES _____ NO _____

D. All deficiencies discovered are immediately corrected and reported to the COR.

YES _____ NO _____ N/A_______

E. Performed maintenance to each system IAW manufacturer’s recommendation.

YES _____ NO _____

F. Performed hydrostatic testing as required. YES______NO_______N/A_______

G. Entire work area cleaned immediately after completion of work. YES _____ NO _____

H. Safety: Contractor personnel used the proper safety equipment in the performance of this contract. YES _____ NO _____

REMARKS:

INSPECTED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _______________________

INSPECTOR: ________________________ CONTRACTOR: ___________________________

(SIGNATURE) (SIGNATURE)