APPENDIX_D_-_QASP.pdf

D-1

APPENDIX D

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. This plan is included for information purposes. Payment analysis will be conducted by using the Random, Planned, or 100% sampling method; however, the Government has the right to change or modify inspection methods at its discretion.

2. DEFINITIONS.

2.1 Acceptable Quality Level (AQL). This AQL is a predetermined 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. 4.0%, 6.5%, and 10.0%) as per table A-1. The AQL tables has three parts: Lot (Population) size, sample size, and the allowable reject level (also called reject level).

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

EXAMPLE: 505 picnic tables to be cleaned each scheduled day X20 cleaning days/month (chosen inspection period) 10,100 Lot (Population) size

2.3 Sample Size. The number of samples to be taken per Lot size as determined by the assigned AQL level.

2.4 Allowable Reject Level (ARL) (Also called the reject level on some AQL tables). The ARL is the allowable margin or error allowed the contractor under the Random and Planned Sampling Method. When the observed total number of defects per inspection period is equal to or below the ARL, the work will 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 deductions and will include a review of the Contractor’s Quality Control Program. Notification of unsatisfactory performance exceeding the ARL shall be brought to the attention of the Contractor.

EXAMPLE: AQL level of 0.10, population of 10,100, sample size of 26 will be equal to an ARL level of 6 per Table A-1.

3. PAYMENT ANALYSIS.

3.1 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 given service requirements. Random sampling is considered where there is a large homogenous 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.

3.1.1 Monitoring. Inspection of all services performed under this method will be conducted according to a schedule 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 purposes.

3.1.2 Deductions. Once a random sample has been taken of a lot and the number of defective items exceeds the AARL for that lot, deduction will be based on the following example:

D-2

IF: Quality of work completed for cleaning picnic tables is found to be unsatisfactory (the AQL of 4% is exceeded)

AND: Contact price is $4,000.00 per month

AND: Quality of completed work deduct percentage is 15% (percentage obtained when cost per month for a specific bid item is divided by total contract cost per month).

AND: Sample size is 100.

AND: Number of defects in sample is 25 (Reject number is 4).

THEN: Deduction from the current month’s invoice will be calculated a follows:

Contract Price $4,000 Deduct Percentage 0.15 $ 600 Percent of Sample Defective 0.25

Deduction from monthly payment for cleaning picnic tables during the month $ 150

3.2 Planning Sampling Method. Surveillance by planned sampling, like random sampling, is designed to inspect some part, but not all of the contract services requirement being monitored. Planned sampling under this contract shall differ from random sampling only in the way in which samples are selected. The same AQL tables shall be used (where practical) with lot size, sample size, and the ARL’s remaining the same. Planned sampling shall be used in lieu of random sampling when the lot size is not large enough to make the random tables practical, when the services are not critical enough to warrant 100% inspection, or to avoid excessive traveling and loss of productive time for the Quality Assurance Inspector. The results of these inspections, like random sampling, are then compared to the specific performance standards.

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

3.2.1 Monitoring. Inspection of all services performed under this method will be conducted according to a schedule 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.

3.2.2 Deductions. Only 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 using the information as stated in the bulletin board example above:

EXAMPLE: a. Contact price for bulletin boards is $19.00

b. Population size is 38

c. Sample size using an AQL of 0.05 is 15. (AQL and sample size as chosen by the Government)

D-3

d. Number of defects in the sample is 6. (ARL of 3 as chosen by the Government)

e. Percentage of sample defective is 40 (d/c = 6/15 = .40)

f. Deduction for current month is $7.60

(a X e = $19.00 x .40 = $7.60)

3.3 100% 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. However, 100% Inspection Method may be used at the discretion of the Government. The inspection results are compared to the specific performance standards.

3.3.1 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 or park will be inspected and used for evaluating performance.

3.3.2 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 will ensure that these defects do not recur. If the Contractor fails to rework the rejected areas or the defects are recurring, the Government may:

3.3.2.1 Reduce the contract price to equal the reduced value of the service.

3.3.2.2 Perform the required services, by contract or otherwise, and deduct any cost incurred by the Government that are directly related to the performance of such services from the Contractor’s monthly invoice.

3.3.2.3 Terminate the contract for default.

3.3.2.4 Deductions. The deduction taken under this method will be based on the following examples:

EXAMPLE: a. Monthly lot contract price for cleaning the picnic/camping units is $50.40

b. Lot size in Temple Park is 60

c. Sample size is 100% or 60

d. Number of defects is 15

e. Percentage of Sample defects is .25

f. The deduction from the current month’s invoice for the picnic/camping units is $12.60.

(A X E) = G ($50.40 X .25 = $12.60)