ATTACHMENT_2_-_QASP.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR SERVICES

(IAW FAR 37.604, 46.4 & 46.6)

AWARD DESCRIPTION

Grounds Maintenance at the Rogue River Basin Projects

INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to evaluate the service contractor performance. It is designed to provide an effective surveillance method of monitoring contractor performance. The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the services the contractor is required to furnish.

The contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control to meet the requirements of each individual. The role of the Government is quality assurance to ensure standards are achieved.

Quality Assurance will be performed by the District Project Delivery Team (PDT). Each task order under the contract will require a Quality Control Plan (QCP) by the contractor, which will be reviewed and approved by the COR. It is anticipated that there will not be any special considerations that must be addressed by another District, government agency unless listed below:

• Risks inherent to the Project:

N/A

• Special Considerations that must be addressed by another USACE District or Government Agency:

N/A

The QCSP is the driver for product quality. The contractor is required to develop a comprehensive program of inspections and monitoring actions. The first major step to ensuring this is to ensure that the quality control program approved at the beginning of the contract provides the measures needed to lead the contractor to success. Once the QCSP is approved, careful application of the process and standards presented in the remainder of this document will ensure a robust QCP.

PROJECT DELIVERY TEAM MEMBERS & KEY DUTIES

The following personnel are members of the Project Delivery Team (PDT) who are responsible for the oversight and coordination of the surveillance activities as described below.

Organization/Agency: USACE, Portland District Project Manager: N/A Designated COR: Tara Hawskley Procurement Contracting Officer:

Contract Specialist:

Other PDT Members:

Name Responsibility 1.

2.

3.

Subject: QASP

Procurement 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 task order. The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance. The PCO or Contracting Specialist will review the monthly COR report after it has been filed and before the last day of the current month.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the task order and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The COR will review the inspection of all task order deliverables by other PDT members as required by the contract to ensure contractor compliance with the requirements.

Inspection results will be recorded in the monthly COR report to the PCO.

CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s program manager for this contract.

Project Manager:

Other Key Contractor Personnel:

Name Responsibility

1.

2.

3.

CONTRACTOR 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 Performance Requirements Summary Matrix

Location where Government will perform surveillance: Field Patrols at Elk Creek, Applegate and Lost Cree Lake

The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL). The specific requirements will be spelled out in each specific task order.

Indicator

Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

Method of

Surveillance

Performance

Task order specific requirements are completed with a rating of "satisfactory" or higher.

90%

Monthly inspection and reporting.

Quality of Deliverables or Service

Written plans and reports are accepted within 2 submissions and remedial actions are accepted without rework required.

inspection and reporting.

Schedule Adherence

Task order deliverables are completed within the proposed schedule within the firm’s control as originally awarded or modified.

inspection and reporting.

Cost Control

Tasks will be completed within the awarded price for items within the contractor’s control as originally awarded or modified.

inspection and reporting.

OVERSIGHT

The Government will evaluate the performance objectives through surveillance as reflected in the matrix above. The COR will file monthly reports through the Army’s Virtual Contracting Enterprise (VCE): Contracting Officer Representative Tracking (CORT) Tool. Monthly reports are due by the 15th of each month.

The COR will document any deficiency using a “Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR)” DA Form 5479-R, Nov

85. The COR will verbally notify the Project Manager (PM) and PCO of the deficiency and will submit a copy of the CDR as an Action Memo to the PM/PCO. The COR will ensure the CDR is completed in its entirety and coordinated through the Contracting Officer. The Contractor will also be furnished a copy of the CDR. The Contractor shall furnish their response to the CDR. The contractor’s response will address the accuracy and validity of the defect, planned corrective action and actions to prevent recurrence. The CDR information will be included when assessing the Contractor’s overall performance (i.e., past performance assessments, exercise of options, etc.).

If any of the services do not conform to the stated requirements, the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with said stated requirements. The Contractor must correct the defect(s) within the timeframes established by the COR. The COR shall not certify satisfactory performance for any task orders until all defects have been corrected.

When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the Government may:

1) Require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to stated requirements; and,

2) Reduce the delivery order price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.

The COR shall maintain a complete quality assurance file in the Army VCE: CORT Tool database. The COR file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions relating to the Government’s performance of the quality assurance function, including originals of all surveillance activity checklists. All such records will be retained for the life of the contract.

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

• Monthly Inspection & Reporting – At a minimum, evaluate and report finding on a monthly basis. If the AE firm quality of work is not satisfactory, inspection may need to be done more frequently. The COR and PCO should discuss the frequency if the quality of the work is questionable or a major quality issue arises.

• Analysis of contractor's progress reports - Evaluate contractor for performance, quality, cost, and schedule adherence for the award.

• Direct oversight should be performed by the USACE personnel only. COR is directly responsible for all reporting.

RATINGS

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. The rating scale below is the scale similar to the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). By using the following scale it will be easier to perform the CPARS evaluation when the task order is complete.

Rating Definition Note

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated w as accomplished w ith few minor problems for w hich corrective actions taken by the contractor w ere highly effective.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple signif icant events and state how they w ere of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, how ever, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been no signif icant w eaknesses identif ied.

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 w as accomplished w ith some minor problems for w hich corrective actions taken by the contractor w as effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a signif icant event and state how it w as a benefit to the Government. There should have been no signif icant w eaknesses identif ied.

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for w hich corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or w ere satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from w ithout impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO signif icant w eaknesses identif ied. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors w ill not be evaluated w ith a rating low er 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 w hich the contractor has not yet identif ied corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or w ere not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a signif icant 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 notif ied the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

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 w hich the contractor’s corrective actions appear or w ere ineffective.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple signif icant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, how ever, 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).

DOCUMENT REVIEWS

Reviews of AE Contractors Design Documents and submittals will be by (as checked)

Formal – The PDT will evaluate and respond to each comment in writing. Responses will clearly state concurrence or non-concurrence with the requirement. The PDT team should also document project lessons learned.

Informal – The COR and PDT will periodically communicate throughout the project development process.

The COR team will render comments and recommendations to the PDT from time-to-time to avoid lost effort due to errors.

Editorial Comments – Some comments and suggestions are about minor issues, while valid, may best be made informally, in parallel with but external to the official process, in order to ensure the PDT focuses on significant deficiencies. However, a large number of editorial errors indicate that the QCP/QAP have not been followed and should be noted by a single comment in the review.

DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

Acceptable Performance –

The Government shall document positive performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action.

Unacceptable Performance –

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file. When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare and present it to the contractor's program manager and to the PCO.

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

Any formal communications issued by the COR may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the PCO.

FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

During task order performance, the COR will review or will have the submittals reviewed and evaluated by technical personnel for accuracy and completeness as required in the PWS/SOW. The COR will then report the findings in a frequency not less than monthly report in the VCE:CORT Tool.

ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICES

Acceptance of services shall be based upon compliance with performance standards described in the PWS/SOW and surveillance procedures described in this QASP. Prior to approving/certifying any Contractor invoices, the COR will verify that all invoiced services have been performed in compliance with task order requirements.

Tara Hawksley Contracting Officer Representative Procurement Contracting Officer USACE, Portland District USACE, Portland District