Exhibit A QASP.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

1. QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP). This plan will be used to assure the Government that the work specified under this contract is completed satisfactorily. The Government retains the right to change or modify this plan at its discretion. The Government further reserves the right to change the method or level (reduced, normal or tightened) of surveillance for any services at any time. Deductions for unperformed services will be determined in accordance with the deductions procedure for the surveillance method used.

2. DEFINITIONS:

a. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL). The AQL is a pre-determined value selected and used by the Government Quality Assurance Inspector to distinguish between satisfactory and unsatisfactory performance. For evaluation by random/planned sampling, AQL's are stated in percentages (i.e. 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, and 0.20) as per table A-1. The AQL tables have three parts: Lot (Population) size, sample size, and the allowable reject level.

b. Lot (Population Size). The total number of required services per inspection period from which a sample is to be drawn.

Example: 505 picnic sites to be cleaned each scheduled day

* 20 cleaning days/month (chosen inspection period) 10,100 Lot (population size)

c. Sample Size. The number of samples to be taken per lot size as determined by the assigned AQL level. Example: AQL level of 0.10 and a population of 10,100 will equal a Sample Size of 26 as per Table A-1.

d. Allowable Reject Level (ARL). The ARL is the allowable margin of error allowed the Contractor under the Random and Planned Sampling Methods. When the observed total number of defects per inspection period is equal to or below the ARL, the work shall be considered satisfactory. If the observed total number of defects per inspection period is greater than the ARL, the work will be considered unsatisfactory. Unsatisfactory ratings will require corrective action and/or deductions, and will include a review of the Contractor's Quality Control Program. Notification of unsatisfactory performance exceeding the ARL will be in the form of a Deficiency Report issued by the COR or authorized representative.

Example: AQL of 0.10, population of 10,100, sample size of 26 will equal an ARL of 6 as per Table A-1.

3. PAYMENT ANALYSIS.

a. RANDOM SAMPLING METHOD. Surveillance based on random sampling is a Government Quality Assurance evaluation method designed to evaluate some part, but not all, of the contract service requirements being monitored. This method, based on statistical theory, estimates the contractor's overall level of performance for a given service requirement. Random sampling is considered where there is a large homogeneous population and a 100% inspection is not feasible. Surveillance of the results of a scheduled service is based on samples from finished work using the random sample table. These results are then compared to the specified performance standards.

(1) Monitoring. Inspection of all services performed under this method will be conducted according to a sched- ule developed by the Government. Inspection samples will be selected randomly from each lot. Only those Items appearing in the random samples will be used for evaluating performance.

(2) Deductions. Once a random sample has been taken of a lot, and the number of defective Items exceeds the ARL for that lot, a deduction will be based on the following example:

PARAGRAPH “a” RANDOM SAMPLING DEDUCTION METHOD (Clean Picnic Sites)

b. PLANNED SAMPLING METHOD. Surveillance by planned sampling, like random sampling, is designed to inspect some part, but not all of the contract service requirements being monitored. Planned sampling under this plan will differ from random sampling only in the way in which samples are selected. The same AQL tables will be used (where practical) with lot size, sample size, and ARL's remaining the same. Planned sampling will be used in lieu of random sampling when the lot size is not large enough to make the random tables practical, or the service is not critical enough to warrant 100% inspection, or to avoid excessive travel and loss of productive time for the inspector. The results of these inspections, like random sampling, are then compared to the specific performance standards.

EXAMPLE: The inspector is to inspect bulletin boards. Bulletin board lot size is only 38 and occurs in only one park and the headquarters area. If the random sampling method determines that the inspector must inspect the cleaning service of restrooms in a particular park that contains a bulletin board, then the inspector may chose, by planned sampling, to inspect the cleaning of that bulletin board in that same park rather than drive to another park to make a separate similar inspection.

(1) Monitoring. Inspection of all services performed under this method will be conducted according to a sched- ule developed by the Government. The Government may, however, choose facilities it wishes to inspect without randomly selecting. Only those samples will be used for evaluating performance.

(2) Deductions. Once a planned sample has been taken of a lot, and the number of defective Items exceeds the ARL (as chosen by the Government) for that lot, a deduction will be based on the following example:

PARAGRAPH “b” PLANNED SAMPLING DEDUCTION METHOD (Clean Bulletin Boards)

c. 100% INSPECTION METHOD. Surveillance by this method requires that every occurrence of a performed service be monitored. Contract requirements using these evaluations are generally those that occur infrequently, or are essential, or are costly to perform. These results are then compared to the specific performance standards.

(1) Monitoring. Inspection of all services performed under this method will be conducted according to a schedule developed by the Government. All services in a lot will be inspected and used for evaluating performance.

(2) Deductions. The COR may require that all work which fails to provide the desired results be redone or reduce the contract price to equal the reduced value of the service. The contractor shall ensure that defects do not recur. If the contractor fails to rework the rejected areas or the defects are recurring, the Government may:

(3) Reduce the contract price to equal the reduced value of the service.

(4) Perform the required services, by contract or otherwise, and deduct any costs incurred by the Government that is directly related to the performance of such services from the contractor's monthly invoice.

(5) Terminate the contract for default.

(6) Deductions. The deductions taken under this method will be based on the following examples:

100% INSPECTION DEDUCTION METHOD

(Clean Camp Sites Example 1)

100% INSPECTION DEDUCTION METHOD

(Janitorial Services Example 2)

(7) Should it become necessary for the inspector to perform re-inspections of defective work that was required to be redone (due to failure of the contractor Quality Control System to locate and cure these deficiencies prior to the Government’s inspection), there will be a re-inspection/administration charge equal to the Actual Government Cost (AGC) at the Effective Hourly Rate (E.H.R.) applied to re-inspect. The AGC re-inspection time will start the minute the inspector is called and or stops other duties to perform the re-inspection and will end when the inspector returns to the duty site after the inspection. These charges will be deducted from the contractor's monthly invoice. Re-inspection charges will only be deducted when the contractor has been given the opportunity to redo work that was not originally performed correctly. If work is not performed correctly after given the opportunity to redo, then deductions will be made as shown in paragraph “c”. Deductions for re-inspection will be taken based on the following example:

Re-inspection of picnic site cleaning is required on 15 sites in a particular park and on 2 sites in another park. The inspector was at the office when called to re-inspect. The actual time to inspect the two parks and return to the office was 40 minutes. The inspector's Effective Hourly Rate (E.H.R.) is $11.30 per hour. The re-inspection deduction will be made as follows:

E.H.R.X (Inspection minutes/60 minutes) = deduction or $11.30 * (40/60) = $7.53

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

The required standards of all work to be performed shall meet the PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT as specified. A “LOT” equals the number of executions within the inspection period.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL

DEGREE OF DEVIATION

QASP METHOD

Inspected

Inspected

Inspected

Inspected

Inspected

Inspected

TABLE A-1

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL) Sample Sizes and Reject Levels Normal Surveillance