A22_Attachment_10_(QRT_Sample_Task_Order_FINAL_-_May_26_2017).pdf

Common Operational Mission Picture Increasing Lethal Effects (COMPILE)

Quick Reaction Test (QRT) Nomination

SAMPLE TASK – FOR CONTRACTING PURPOSE ONLY

COMMON OPERATIONAL MISSION PICTURE INCREASING LETHAL EFFECTS

(COMPILE)

QUICK REACTION TEST (QRT) NOMINATION

1. Title.

a. Project Name and Sponsoring Organizations: Common Operational Mission Picture

Increasing Lethal Effects (COMPILE)

i) Sponsor: Headquarters Air Force, Directorate of ISR Innovations (HQ AF/A2Q)

ii) Operational Endorsers: Marine Forces Pacific (MARFORPAC); Pacific Air Forces

(PACAF); Special Operations Command Pacific (SOCPAC); and United States

Pacific Command (USPACOM)

iii) Operational Test Agency (OTA): U.S. Air Force Joint Test Office (AFJO)

b. Nominating Organization/Sponsor and Point of Contact (POC): HQ AF/A2Q, 1700 Air

Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1700. Nomination POC: Lt Col Peter Lehaa;

Phone: (703) 693-1155; E-mail: pete.lehaa@us.af.mil.

2. Problem Background.

a. Nature and Origin of the Problem. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) consist of three components – the air vehicle and its payload, the ground control station, and the communications links between the aircraft and the control station. These systems have been developed and employed to meet specific Service-oriented needs, initially for surveillance and reconnaissance, and later as a platform to employ kinetic weapons. As the needs and capabilities of the Services became more interdependent during Operations ENDURING

FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM, the interaction between the Services has been stymied by the “stovepipe” nature of these UAS systems. For example, software applications have been implemented in USPACOM in the effort to exchange information between the Services but, while making it possible to distribute the intelligence data more effectively between each

Service’s intelligence support nodes, it has been demonstrated that these applications have not been focused on distributing operational data between the Services. Specifically, and for example, situational awareness (SA) during UAS missions is dependent on mission-specific tools and the ad-hoc data exchange architecture behind these tools. The “workaround” to solve this current SA problem is by using low information density radio calls, two-dimensional graphics, and outdated imagery and aeronautical charts.

b. What Cannot Be Done. Due to different mission needs and Service UAS capabilities, no single tool or universal standard for disseminating operational information, i.e. actionable intelligence and SA data, is realistic. The existing information exchange architecture results in limited or nonexistent actionable intelligence/information exchange between Air

Operations Centers (AOC), Distributed Common Ground Stations (DCGS), UAS operators, fires control elements, air space managers, and supported units (collectively known as

“mission team” members). Specifically, mission effectiveness is degraded by the lack of a

Revised and Replaced by Amendment 0004 u4cttpvf Typewritten Text Solicitation Attachment 10 fused operational picture. The existing fielded tools rely primarily on user activation or update as a means of exchanging information with other applications and other participants on the mission team. A sampling of these tools includes the web-based Skynet portal, passive Link-16, UAS tracking tools (e.g., Multi-Pred, Super Splitter, Command Post of the

Future), Precision Fires Imagery, Precision Strike Suite – Special Operations Forces [SOF], Zeus, FalconView, GoogleEarth, and Mardam-Bey Internet Relay Chat. The reliance on this disconnected technology results in degraded mission SA, contributes to poor cohesiveness, and results in ineffective UAS mission management when employing UAS-delivered weapons. Because of this disparity in capabilities, field commanders do not trust the ability of the users to create a common picture with essential mission data. No tested solution to this problem exists that can give commanders the confidence in a User Defined Operational

Picture (UDOP).

c. For Whom This Is a Problem. The current inability to effectively share data across the

UAS enterprise primarily affects U.S. Army, Marine, and Air Force tactical execution of the surveillance/reconnaissance and armed reconnaissance mission sets. The highly joint nature of the UAS enterprise and the broad dissemination of intelligence data push the effects of these shortcomings up to the operational echelons at AOCs, combatant command staffs, and mission planners. The nature of UAS operations requires a user defined information feed that facilitates distributed real time collaboration to support weapons employment operations from UAS systems.

d. What Makes This a Joint Issue. Air Force Predator/Reaper UAS currently support Army, USMC, and SOF ground forces around the clock as their primary customer. We need joint agreement on an open architecture that allows for a loose coupling of applications that enables the exchange of mission information essentials (who, what, where, and when). A

“services-oriented architecture (SOA)” approach can provide a way for mission data consumers to access available SOA-based services. This approach does not require replacing any existing tools but drives joint solution to how the tactical warfighter can expose and share mission data among the UAS mission team.

3. Flag Officer/General Officer Statement. The burgeoning demand for UAS capabilities on the battlefield has resulted in accelerated fielding without the time to address the larger architecture and supporting tools required to optimize their impact.

“Lack of UAV interoperability has had a real-life impact on U.S. operations … there have been cases where a Service’s UAV, if it could have gotten data to another Service, another component, it may have provided better situational awareness on a specific threat in a specific area that might have resulted in different measures being taken.”

name title, Unmanned Warfare

“Open architecture (OA) and open interfaces need to be leveraged to address problems with proprietary robotic system architectures. Standards and interface specifications

Revised and Replaced by Amendment 0004 need to be established to achieve modularity, commonality, and interchangeability across payloads, control systems, video/audio interfaces, data, and communication links. This openness will enhance competition, lower life-cycle costs, and provide warfighters with enhanced unmanned capabilities that enable commonality and joint interoperability on the battlefield.”

Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap 2011-2036

4. Proposed Problem Statement. Commanders do not have a tested solution for generating a common mission picture from the disparate UAS applications currently in use by the distributed mission teams (supported unit, UAS system operators, and intelligence support nodes).

5. Scope and Limitations.

a. The COMPILE QRT will use existing UAS video feeds, data link architecture, and command and control (C2) equipment and technologies to provide near real-time SA information at each mission team echelon. The test will demonstrate the ability to create a user defined mission picture by each member of the distributed mission team. It will focus on the totality of the four needed tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) functions:

i. Expose and share the data: Identifying the data elements that would provide increased mission effectiveness for other members of the mission team. Selecting an application for a common data layer that can be accessed by each member of the mission team.

ii. User level filtering of the data: Defining the means for individual users to filter the information (UDOP).

iii. Tag the data associated with specific mission: Defining the means of “tagging” individual data elements to a mission and thus sharing with the other members of the mission team.

iv. Collaborate/expand on the specific data: Defining the means to contribute additional information to the original data set for mission collaboration.

b. Although coordination has been accomplished to ensure their availability, a test limitation would be the availability of Air Force Predator/Reaper platforms and support systems during the testing phase of the COMPILE QRT. The lack of at least one of these UAS assets would negatively influence being able to accomplish a end-to-end assessment of the COMPILE QRT-developed TTP; the TTP will be the QRT test article.

c. The COMPILE QRT will use a series of table-top exercises to establish the proper architecture of software applications and to outline the process (TTP) for performing the above four functions. A risk reduction event will verify the test methodology and a field test event will provide sufficient trials to provide the necessary confidence that all mission team members are able to access and utilize the capability described in the TTP.

6. Purpose of the Proposed Test.

a. Purpose. The COMPILE QRT will outline the architecture for UAS mission information exchange and develop TTPs that will enable users to effectively contribute and recall mission data within the UAS enterprise. It will provide a tested solution that will give field commanders the confidence to create and sustain a UDOP.

“The interoperability goal for Unmanned Systems is an ability to provide ... information

… to and accept the same from other systems, units, or forces … and to use the exchanged … information … to enable them to operate effectively together.”

Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap 2011-2036

b. Expected Results. The COMPILE QRT will develop and evaluate the process for sharing

UAS mission data between mission team members. A successful test will demonstrate the ability of each member of the mission team to access, filter, and share data elements with other members of the mission team using their current mission tools in order to increase the lethal effects of UAS-delivered weapons.

c. Benefit to the Warfighter. The COMPILE QRT will provide fused mission information to

UAS mission teams allowing for a true common mission picture and enhanced situational awareness. This common mission picture will allow mission team members:

Battlespace awareness

Distributed collaboration

Video enhancement and distribution

Machine assistance and automation

7. Test Products. The expected test product includes the COMPILE QRT-developed TTP to share UAS mission data and associated inputs to doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities with recommended changes to enhance joint

UAS synchronization, employment, and de-confliction.

8. Test Schedule. The COMPILE QRT will develop and evaluate the process for sharing UAS mission data between mission team members. A COMPILE QRT-developed TTP, starting from existing best practices, will start the documentation and development of this process. The

COMPILE QRT will use a series of table-top exercises to establish the proper architecture of software applications and to outline the process for performing the above four functions cited in

5.a. above.

COMPILE QRT Test Schedule

A risk reduction event will verify the test methodology and a test event will provide sufficient trials to provide the necessary confidence that all mission team members are able to access and utilize the capability described in the TTP. The figure above illustrates the overall test schedule.

9. Related Efforts. The UAS-AI is not duplicative of other efforts. Although there are many

UAS related programs ongoing in the Department of Defense and civilian markets, no organizations are attempting to develop and assess the proposed COMPILE QRT-developed TTP described in this nomination. The COMPILE QRT is focused on the exchange of digital information between UAS mission control components and the intelligence nodes for exploitation of the intelligence data and command and control nodes for planning and control of

UAS-delivered weapons employment in support of ground operations. It does not provide a common operational picture to the mission teams that allow for user-defined filtering for specific joint mission teams.

10. QRT Logistics.

a. QRT Test Director: name, Air Force Pentagon, Washington DC 20330-1755; Phone:

(xxx) xxx-xxxx, E-mail: name@address.mil

b. Location: AFJO, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. Commander, AFJO will provide necessary office space, administrative, automated data processing, network, and communications support for the QRT team.

11. QRT Cost. DOT&E costs are provided in the table below:

CATEGORY DOT&E USAF

Government Personnel (Mil/Civ)

Service Responsibility

Facilities AFJO Responsibility

Travel (Gov’t) $35K Travel (Contractor) $30K Contractor Labor $875K

Total Costs $940K

12. Sponsorship, Operational Endorsement, and OTA Support Letters.

a. Lead Sponsor: HQ AF/A2Q is the lead sponsor and will provide the Test Director and necessary subject matter experts (SME) support. The signed sponsor letter signed by

Headquarters Air Force, Title, Department, Name, SES, is provided separately.

b. Resource Sponsor: AFJO, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, will provide government facilities to host the QRT team. The signed OTA support letter from Commander, AFJO is provided separately.

c. Operational Endorsements. All operational endorsers will provide necessary SME support to the QRT project; these include:

MARFORPAC Chief of Staff (pending)

PACAF Commander (pending)

SOCPAC J3 (pending)

USPACOM J8 (pending)

d. OTA: AFJO support letter is provided separately.

13. Coalition Participation. No coalition participation anticipated or planned for during this

QRT.

SAMPLE TASK – FOR CONTRACTING PURPOSES ONLY

COMPETITION SENSITIVE

COMPILE QRT PWS 1

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

QUICK REACTION TEST (QRT)

ENGINEERING, TEST, AND ANALYSIS SERVICES

1. OBJECTIVE. The contractor shall provide engineering, test, and analysis services to the

Common Operational Mission Picture Increasing Lethal Effects (COMPILE) Test Director (TD) in the conduct of the Quick Reaction Test (QRT) project.

2. SCOPE. This task will be conducted within the scope of Part 3 (QRT) of the basic contract

Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Joint Test and Evaluation (JT&E) Engineering Services and this PWS. Work will be performed at a designated government facility located at Nellis Air

Force Base (AFB), Nevada. Contractor personnel shall also be required to perform travel to various commands within the continental United States and to South Korea.

3. BACKGROUND. The COMPILE QRT was directed on Month Day, 20XX, by the Deputy

Director, Air Warfare (DD,AW), Director Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), under the authority of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), to address urgent warfighter requirements. The COMPILE QRT project was directed to develop, test, and refine tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) for sharing unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) mission data between mission team members. The TTP will enable each member of the mission team to access, filter, and share UAS data elements with other members of the team using their current mission support tools in order to increase the lethal effects of UAS-delivered weapons.

The QRT results will provide qualitative and quantitative data analysis to support findings, conclusions, and recommendations to United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) and its functional component’s leadership. The expected test product includes the TTP to share UAS mission data and associated inputs to doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities with recommended changes to enhance joint UAS synchronization, employment, and de-confliction. Headquarters Air Force, Directorate of

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Innovations (ISR) (HQ AF/A2Q) is the QRT sponsor and will provide the TD and subject matter expert (SME) support. The U.S. Air Force

Joint Test Office (AFJO) is the supporting Operational Test Agency (OTA) and will also provide the facilities and infrastructure (office equipment, administrative services, and communications systems, etc.) needed to conduct the QRT. Marine Forces Pacific (MARFORPAC), Pacific Air

Forces (PACAF), Special Operations Command Pacific (SOCPAC), and USPACOM are operational endorsers and will provide subject matter experts (SMEs) to support TTP development and final test product transition.

4. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 Establish and Organize the QRT. The contractor shall coordinate with the Contracting

Officer’s Representative (COR) for establishing and organizing the QRT at the locations

COMPILE QRT PWS 2

specified above. The contractor shall conduct studies, analyze options, and brief or provide briefing support to make recommendations to the TD or on organizational structures and business processes necessary to carry out the assigned charter using the Project Plan, Joint

Test and Evaluation (JT&E) Program Handbook, and other government-supplied materials as guides. The contractor team shall execute the PMP in accordance with the approved schedule.

4.2 Test Planning. Provide the QRT draft Test Plan (TP), which shall be developed in accordance with TD guidance and in compliance with the JT&E Program Handbook, to include all activities to be accomplished, recommended responsibilities for the activities, and recommended specific milestones by which progress can be measured. The Test Plan will include, but is not limited to, test description, test concept, test planning and coordination, test control, data management, analysis and evaluation, test article, and identify resource requirements for conducting the test events.

4.3 Test Execution. The COMPILE QRT will investigate, develop, and assess TTP designed to enable each member of the mission team to access, filter, and share UAS data elements with other members of the team using their current mission support tools in order to increase the lethal effects of UAS-delivered weapons. The QRT will be conducted in five phases (-research and data collection phase, TTP development phase, testing phase, out- reach phase, and transition and closedown phase with two field tests during the testing phase. The first test event will be a table top exercise (TTX) to refine the draft TTP in a controlled environment.

The second test event will be a table top exercise (TTX) to validate the TTP following the first test event. This final test event will validate the QRT-developed TTP in an operationally relevant field test environment.

4.4 Analysis

The Contractor shall reduce collected data, logically assemble, examine, and analyze the data collected during test execution in order to calculate test measures. Where measurement criteria exist, analysis will also encompass a comparison to those criteria. The analysis will assess the performance of the test article and determine the meaningfulness of observed effects in terms of operational impact. The analysis will also assess the importance of trends that analysts cannot verify statistically, and provide insights into why observed effects were (or were not) demonstrated. The Contractor shall also analyze any data issues that arise and make recommendations for their resolution. The Contractor shall establish configuration control procedures to ensure that no programs or data are modified without TD and COR approval and documentation. In the case of data issues that directly bring T&E methods and techniques into question, the Contractor shall provide risk analyses and develop a risk mitigation plan with options for consideration by the TD.

4.5 Evaluation

Evaluation is a broad analytical approach to convert test statistics, developed during the analysis process, into an operational context to answer the test issue(s). The Contractor shall conduct an evaluation to aggregate the test results and provide an operational interpretation of the results. During the evaluation process, the Contractor shall develop draft QRT test findings, conclusions, and recommendations and present these to the TD for consideration. As needed, the Contractor shall be prepared to present the test findings, conclusions, and

COMPILE QRT PWS 3

recommendations to operational subject matter experts (i.e., JWAG members) to determine their relevancy to the warfighter.

4.6 Deliverables

A complete list of Contractor deliverables is specified in section 6 (below). All deliverables shall be reviewed and approved by the TD and COR. All products developed will be prepared in accordance with the format, style guide, and timelines specified in this PWS. The format for all JT&E Program Office (JPO)-required documents (i.e., Monthly Status Report, Test Plan, and Final Report) and style guide instructions are provided in the current version of the JT&E

Program Handbook and JT&E Style Guide. Both of these documents are available at the

JT&E Program website (http://www.jte.osd.mil/). During the execution of the QRT, the

Contractor shall develop, prepare, and deliver the following products based on the timelines provided below:

4.6.1 Monthly Status Report

The Contractor shall submit to the TD and COR a monthly status and resource report no later than the seventh of each month or the next business day if the seventh falls on weekend or holiday. This report shall include, at a minimum, the following information:

major activities conducted during the previous month; progress of work on assigned tasks;

conferences/meetings attended in the previous month and planned for in the next three months; travel completed in the previous month and planned for in the next three months;

issues or problems solved or currently being worked; and the total expenditure of contract funds and labor hours during the month. The Contractor’s monthly report shall be of sufficient completeness and fidelity to allow timely project management and oversight by the TD and COR.

4.6.2 Work Breakdown Structure

The Contractor shall develop a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), which details human resources available, identifies project tasks, deliverables, assignments, and establishes suspense dates for all major QRT milestones, to include test product development and transition, to meet the scope and timelines established in the QRT directive letter. The

Contractor shall deliver the WBS to the TD and COR no later than 20 working days after task award.

4.6.3 Trip Reports and JWAG Meeting Minutes

These reports document the purpose of the contractor trips and JWAG meetings and will include the dates executed, who participated, and what were the intent, issues, results, and conclusions of the trip/meeting. These products are due to the TD and COR no later than five working days after the event is completed.

4.6.4 Draft Test Plan

The TD will deliver a draft DTP to AFJO no later than 20 working days prior to the first day of each test event. The Contractor shall develop the draft DTP for review by the TD no later than 30 working days prior to the first day of each test event. The DTP will encompass the test issues, measures, data collection, instrumentation, analysis, and evaluation procedures required for execution of each test event. The Contractor shall http://www.jte.osd.mil/

COMPILE QRT PWS 4

conduct studies and perform research to make recommendations concerning instrumentation and test resources required to execute test events (that is, communications, logistics, material, data collection, personnel training, and personnel support required).

4.6.5 Test Readiness Review

The TD will schedule and deliver a briefing to the AFJO Commander no later than five working days prior to test execution. The Contractor shall develop the draft briefing for the

TD and also identify administrative requirements if video teleconferencing is required to conduct the briefing. The test readiness review is a decisional briefing to the AFJO

Commander on at least the following test elements:

1. Test Safety. A final check for the preparedness and safety procedures.

2. Test Security. A final check on classification security procedures.

3. Test Design. A final check on robust scenarios to be used and measurable objective data to be captured.

4. Test Training. A final check on the training to be provided for data collectors and operators.

5. TTP and TTP Training. A final check on the status of the TTP (test article) and the status for training the operators on using the TTP.

6. Risk Assessment. A final check and listing of all risks associated with the test event and a mitigation plan or acceptance justification for each.

4.6.6 Quick Look Report

After each test event (i.e., field test) is completed, the Contractor shall submit to the TD and COR a draft QLR no later than five working days after the last day of testing. The

QLR is a top-level summary of the test event and does not include test results or findings.

The QLR provides QRT project feedback to the AFJO and JPO on the accomplishment of the test event objectives, problems or issues encountered, and TD comments on the way ahead. The TD is responsible to send a final QLR to the JPO no later than 10 working days after the last day of testing.

4.6.7 Draft Test Products

The Contractor shall research and perform studies to determine the best methods for articulating the test product(s) of the QRT. Studies and analyses must include a clear definition of test product(s), development methodology, and recommended owners and maintainers of the test products upon closedown of the QRT. The Contractor shall develop the QRT draft test product(s) in the format approved by the TD and COR and in accordance with all applicable security regulations and procedures. The Contractor shall identify the appropriate organization(s) and method to transition the final test product(s) once approved by the TD and COR.

4.6.8 Draft Final Report and Out-Briefing

The Contractor shall develop the draft Final Report based on the completed background research, QRT testing, and test data analysis and evaluation. This report shall be developed as planning and test events occur, and written in accordance with the standards prescribed by the JT&E Program Handbook. Any test products developed (based on the QRT effort) shall be documented in the Final Report. The Contractor shall submit the draft Final Report

COMPILE QRT PWS 5

to the TD no later than 35 working days prior to QRT closedown. The format for the final report will be prepared in accordance with the outline in Appendix N-5 of the JT&E

Program Handbook. In addition, an out-briefing will also be provided to the DD,AW

(DOT&E) and the JPO no later than 10 working days prior to QRT closedown. The

Contractor shall develop the draft out-briefing for the TD. The format for this briefing will be provided by the TD and AFJO Commander.

5.0 ADMINISTRATIVE, MANAGEMENT, AND LOGISTICS

5.1 Administrative

No administrative services are required for the execution of QRT activities.

5.2 Project Management

The Contractor shall employ necessary project management processes in fulfilling the QRT project’s technical requirements.

5.2.1 Orientation

Within 10 working days after task order award, or as coordinated by the TD, the task lead shall participate in a QRT orientation kick off meeting with TD and COR at the QRT project base location. However, use of video teleconferencing capabilities may be employed to conduct the meeting. During this meeting, the Government will discuss requirements (e.g., QRT TP due date), scope, test planning timelines and strategy, and way ahead. The Contractor shall present team structure and discuss project management plan in the areas of scope, timelines, strategy, and available resources. Contractors shall initiate project work immediately following the kick off meeting.

5.2.2 Joint Warfighter Advisory Group

The Contractor shall maintain a roster of the appropriate Government and military subject matter experts throughout the QRT effort, beginning with the establishment of a JWAG.

The Contractor shall coordinate for, schedule, and organize all JWAGs.

5.2.3 Material Management

The Contractor shall comply with Government policies and procedures for maintaining and using Government furnished equipment.

5.3 Information Technology

The Government will provide and maintain local area and wide area networks at both unclassified and classified levels to support QRT activities. The Government will allow

Contractor access to these networks as necessary to execute QRT activities. The Contractor shall use commercial off-the-shelf or use Government off-the-shelf data collection systems.

The Contractor shall establish configuration control procedures to ensure that no programs or data are modified without TD and COR approval and documentation.

COMPILE QRT PWS 6

5.4 Communications

The Government will provide and maintain the communications systems and equipment necessary to support the QRT activities. The Government will allow Contractor access to these communication systems as necessary.

6.0 SCHEDULE, DATA ITEMS, AND OTHER DELIVERABLES

The table below identifies the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) items and other documents to be provided by the Contractor in fulfillment of this task order.

CDRL Title Format Items Due

Date/Frequency Submit to

A001 Status Report MS Office QRT Monthly Status

Report

Monthly; seventh of each month or next business day if seventh falls on weekend or holiday

TD and COR

A002 Project Planning

Chart

MS Office WBS No later than 20 working days after task award

TD and COR

A003 Technical Report

– Study/

Services

MS Office/

Adobe

Trip Reports, Draft

JWAG Meeting Minutes

Draft QLR(s)

Draft Test Product(s)

Draft Final Report

No later than five working days after completion of event

No later than five working days after completion of test event

Within guidelines

No later than 35 working days prior to closedown

TD and COR

A004 Test Plan MS Office Draft Test Plan

Draft Detailed Test Plan

Within guidelines

No later than 30 working days prior to first day of testing

TD and COR

A005 Computer

Software Product

End Items

N/A N/A N/A N/A

A006 Performance and

Cost Report

N/A N/A N/A N/A

COMPILE QRT PWS 7

CDRL Title Format Items Due

Date/Frequency Submit to

A007 Integrated

Program

Management

Report

N/A N/A N/A N/A

A008 Test and

Evaluation

Program Plan

N/A N/A N/A N/A

A009 Presentation

Material

MS Office/

Adobe

As required

As required TD and COR

A010 Contract Funds

Status Report

N/A N/A N/A N/A

A011 Subcontracting

Data (via eSRS)

N/A N/A N/A N/A

A012 Contractor

Manpower

Reporting (via

CMRA)

N/A N/A N/A N/A

A013 Contractor

Quality Control

Plan

N/A N/A N/A N/A

7.0 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE (COR). The CORs for this task order are:

Primary COR:

Name: Lt Col XXX

Organization: AFJO

Address: 5930 Devlin Drive, Bldg 585, City, State Zip: Nellis AFB, Nevada 89191

Phone: (702) XXX-XXXX

E-mail: xxx

Alternate COR:

Name: Maj XXX

Organization: AFJO

Address: 5930 Devlin Drive, Bldg 585, City, State Zip: Nellis AFB, Nevada 89191

Should there be any change to the CORs named above, the Contractor shall be notified in writing.

COMPILE QRT PWS 8

8.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Dress Code. Contractor personnel shall wear an identification/security badge at all times.

Contractors shall dress according to the commander’s guidance; this guidance will be provided during the orientation kick-off meeting.

8.2 Travel. Contractor personnel shall travel to various locations identified in section 2 of this

PWS. All travel will be performed in accordance with Section 1.6.2 of the basic contract PWS and Section H of the basic award document. The Contractor shall not commit to travel without prior approval of the Government. The Contactor shall provide the COR the actual costs for travel at the completion of each trip for review and approval before submittal for invoicing to the Government. Approved travel expenses will be reimbursed in accordance with Federal

Acquisition Regulation 31.205-46.

8.3 Personnel Security. The Compile QRT will be hosted in a Government facility. This project involves access to classified systems and material. All Contractor personnel shall have a DOD Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearance and be eligible for access to Special Access Required (SAR) materials. All documentation (i.e., DD Form

254) required for security certification shall be the responsibility of the Contractor and the client organization. The Contractor shall ensure that classified data is handled in accordance with appropriate DOD security regulations. The cost associated with acquiring necessary security clearances shall be the responsibility of the Contractor.

8.4 Physical and Information Security. The Contractor shall administer and comply with physical security programs for facilities and activities up to and including TS/SCI. These materials and data, as well as the access of QRT individuals to this information shall be handled in accordance with the applicable security instructions or directives. The Contractor shall ensure that classified data is handled in accordance with appropriate DOD security regulations.

8.5 Privacy Act. Work on this project requires that personnel have access to personal information. Personnel shall adhere to the Privacy Act, Title 5 of the U.S. Code, Section 552a and applicable agency rules and regulations.

8.6 Period of Performance. The period of performance will be from date of task order award through the QRT closedown date, which will be one year after the contract task award date.

9.0 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST (OCI)

In providing a proposal for performance of the effort required by this task order, the Contractor certifies that any conflicts of interest have been identified and addressed in either the original contract Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan or, if required, an additional Task

Specific Mitigation Plan.

10.0 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

The TD and COR will measure Contractor performance based on quality of service, schedule, cost control, management, and regulatory compliance. The Task Order COR will rate the overall task

COMPILE QRT PWS 9

order in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for this task. Areas will be rated as “Exceptional,” “Very Good,” “Satisfactory,” “Marginal,” or “Unsatisfactory.”

Performance

Rating

Element

Performance

Objective Performance Standard

Method of

Performance

Assessment

Incentive/Disincentive for Meeting or Not

Meeting the

Acceptable Quality

Level

Quality of

Product or

Service

Submit quality deliverables and products referenced in

Section 6 of the

PWS: Work

Breakdown

Structure, Test

Plan, Monthly

Status Reports, Quick Look

Report(s), Test

Product(s), Final Report

STD: Deliverables shall be accurate, complete, and in the correct format for the assessment venue.

AQL: Acceptable performance of task requires the Contractor to meet at a minimum

95% accuracy and completeness with correction to 100% upon identification of deficiencies, executed within COR specified timelines.

Task CORs review of deliverables; Base

Contract COR monitoring

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Schedule Meet performance deadlines

STD: Deliverables shall be submitted on time per the current JT&E

Handbook and as directed by the Test

Director.

requires the Contractor to meet at a minimum

95% on time delivery.

Extensions may be approved due to factors the Contractor cannot control within COR specified timelines.

Base Contract

COR/Task CORs monitoring of deliverable requirements on schedule

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Cost Control Properly manage not-to-exceed labor and other direct costs, and accurate invoicing

STD: Labor costs do not exceed normal billable hours per month (eight hours per day, five days a week, less holidays);

and all invoices are

100% correct and submitted on time.

Joint review with

Contractor, Base

Contract COR, Task CORs, and

Test Director

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

COMPILE QRT PWS 10

Performance

Rating

Element

Performance

Objective Performance Standard

Method of

Performance

Assessment

Incentive/Disincentive for Meeting or Not

Meeting the

Acceptable Quality

Level

AQL: Remains within approved estimates for labor and cost reimbursable items with no cost overruns; and, any invoice discrepancies are corrected within COR specified timelines.

Management

Coordinate all activities needed to execute the contract

STD: Positive interaction between

Contractor and

Government 95% of the time, with reasonable and cooperative behavior in problem identification and corrective actions.

AQL: Any discrepancies are corrected within

COR specified timelines.

Joint review with

Contractor, Base

Contract COR, Task CORs, and

Test Director

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Management continued

Maintain qualified key personnel

STD: Contracted positions filled with qualified personnel 95% of the time.

AQL: Ability to rapid fill vacancies with qualified replacements;

adverse actions processed expeditiously.

Base Contract

COR/Task CORs monitoring

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Regulatory

Compliance

Maintain personnel security training referenced in

Section 8.3 of the PWS

STD: 100% annual security training will be reported to the COR upon contract award and as required.

AQL: 100% annual security training will be reported to the COR within one week of contract award.

Task CORs monitoring

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Failure to meet the established metrics will result in an unsatisfactory performance rating, and may

COMPILE QRT PWS 11

render a Contractor ineligible for future task order awards.

COMPILE QRT Evaluation Criteria 1

EVALUATION CRITERIA

A best value award decision will be based on cost and other factors. All evaluation factors other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost. However, cost rises in importance relative to the inability of non-cost factors to provide a meaningful discriminator of technical superiority.

The non-cost evaluation factors are:

(A) Management & Technical Approach

(B) Technical Team (expertise/experience)

(C) Past Performance

Factors (A) and (B) are equal in importance, and each is more important than factor (C).

Risk will be considered within each non-cost factor and will not be rated separately.

The Management & Technical Approach aspects of each Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for the adequacy and reasonableness in their proposed methodology and relationship to the PWS.

The Technical Team aspects of each Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on the following sub-factors, which are of equal importance:

The Technical Team factor will be evaluated using the following sub-factors:

Demonstrate the ability to assess and provide an appropriate labor mix to support test objectives

Demonstrate the ability to assess and provide an appropriate level of expertise to support test objectives

The Management & Technical Approach factor will be evaluated using the following sub-factors:

Demonstrate an understanding of test and project scheduling requirements.

Demonstrate the ability to provide a systematic, interdisciplinary approach to fulfill the requirement of the task.

Demonstrate a thorough understanding of operational testing and evaluation methodologies.

COMPILE QRT Evaluation Criteria 2

Demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of test planning and test design, to include the ability to convey the same in concise and thoroughly written test plans.

Demonstrate an understanding of a wide range of data collection planning methodologies and techniques, including knowledge of the set-up, use and function of various data collection instrumentation, data management planning and handling procedures.

COMPILE QRT QASP 1

JOINT TEST AND EVALUATION (JT&E) PROGRAM COMMON OPERATIONAL

MISSION PICTURE INCREASING LETHAL EFFECTS (COMPILE)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Vision: Conduct a Quick Reaction Test (QRT) project as part of the Joint Test and Evaluation

(JT&E) Program under the Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, Deputy

Director for Air Warfare (DD,AW), to address a critical operational joint warfighter need. The

JT&E Program defines a critical operational need as:

A high-priority, emergent shortfall identified from ongoing or recent military operations

A high-priority, emergent shortfall based on the results of a field assessment, operational testing, or information gained from joint lessons learned

An identified tactics, techniques, and procedures shortfall resulting from the rapid fielding of a capability in response to a joint urgent operational need

A QRT project team, led by a QRT Test Director, responds to an urgent, specific, and focused warfighter issue by accomplishing the specific instructions as set forth in its Directive letter signed by DD,AW. That is, in order to solve the issue, the QRT project team will apply its test concept to actual testing, collect data, analyze the data, and develop a test product(s).

MISSION

The COMPILE QRT project was directed to develop, test, and refine tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) for sharing unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) mission data between mission team members. The TTP will enable each member of the mission team to access, filter, and share

UAS data elements with other members of the team using their current mission support tools in order to increase the lethal effects of UAS-delivered weapons.

Purpose: This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government-developed document used to determine if the Contractor's performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:

What will be monitored

How monitoring will take place

Who will conduct the monitoring

How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

The Contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Quality Control Plan. The QASP provides the structure for the Government's surveillance of the Contractor's performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the

Government's responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating Contractor performance.

The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the Contractor's quality control plan. This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on Contractor performance. The

Government may provide a copy of the QASP to the Contractor to facilitate open communication.

COMPILE QRT QASP 2

In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the Contractor.

The QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

Authority: Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal

Acquisition Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses, which provide for inspection, acceptance, and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the contracting officer (KO) or a duly authorized representative.

The KO 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 KO shall also ensure that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The KO shall determine and document the final assessment of the Contractor's performance in the Government’s past performance tracking system.

The KO for the task order is:

Name: Ms. Nancy Sykes

JT&E Team Lead/Contracting Officer/Grants Officer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ERDC

Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199

Phone: (601) 634-2387

E-mail: Nancy.Sykes@usace.army.mil

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the Contractor's performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/ surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the

Contractor's actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the Contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The

QASP is the primary tool for documenting Contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government's behalf.

The Base Contract COR is:

Name: Mr. Willie Thomas

JT&E Deputy Program Manager

Address: 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Building 3072

City, State Zip: Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199

Phone: (601) 634-2826

Fax: (601) 634-4628

E-mail: willie.h.thomas@usace.army.mil mailto:Nancy.Sykes@usace.army.mil

COMPILE QRT QASP 3

Primary COR:

Name: Lt Col XXX

Organization: AFJO

Address: 5930 Devlin Drive, Bldg 585, City, State Zip: Nellis AFB, Nevada 89191

Alternate COR:

Name: Maj XXX

Organization: AFJO

Address: 5930 Devlin Drive, Bldg 585, City, State Zip: Nellis AFB, Nevada 89191

Contract Surveillance: The goal of the QASP is to ensure that Contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR's contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, Program Manager, and the Contractor, which enables positive, open, and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of Contractor performance against contract requirements. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the Contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the Contractor's performance.

Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control/quality assurance actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.

Surveillance Matrix: The surveillance matrix (located below) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the Contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file. The performance Standard (STD) is listed as well as the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The

Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the Contractor's performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The Performance Standards should be used to form the foundation of the COR's inspection checklist.

The Test Director and COR will measure Contractor performance based on quality of service, schedule, cost control, management, and regulatory compliance. The Task Order COR will rate the overall task order in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for

COMPILE QRT QASP 4

this task. Areas will be rated as “Exceptional,” “Very Good,” “Satisfactory,” “Marginal,” or

“Unsatisfactory.”

Performance

Rating

Element

Performance

Objective Performance Standard

Method of

Performance

Assessment

Incentive/Disincentive for Meeting or Not

Meeting the Acceptable

Quality Level

Quality of

Product or

Service

Submit quality deliverables and products referenced in

Section 6 of the

PWS: Work

Breakdown

Structure, Test

Plan, Monthly

Status Reports, Quick Look

Report(s), Test

Product(s), Final Report

STD: Deliverables shall be accurate, complete, and in the correct format for the assessment venue.

AQL: Acceptable performance of task requires the Contractor to meet at a minimum

95% accuracy and completeness with correction to 100% upon identification of deficiencies, executed within COR specified timelines.

Task CORs review of deliverables;

Base Contract

COR

monitoring

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Schedule Meet performance deadlines

STD: Deliverables shall be submitted on time per the current JT&E

Handbook and as directed by the Test

Director.

requires the Contractor to meet at a minimum

95% on time delivery.

Extensions may be approved due to factors the Contractor cannot control within COR specified timelines.

Base Contract

COR/Task

CORs monitoring of deliverable requirements on schedule

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Cost Control Properly manage not-to-exceed labor and other direct costs, and accurate invoicing

STD: Labor costs do not exceed normal billable hours per month (eight hours per day, five days a week, less holidays);

and all invoices are

100% correct and submitted on time.

Joint review with Contractor, Base Contract

COR, Task

CORs, and Test

Director

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

COMPILE QRT QASP 5

Performance

Rating

Element

Performance

Objective Performance Standard

Method of

Performance

Assessment

Incentive/Disincentive for Meeting or Not

Meeting the Acceptable

Quality Level

AQL: Remains within approved estimates for labor and cost reimbursable items with no cost overruns; and, any invoice discrepancies are corrected within COR specified timelines.

Management

Coordinate all activities needed to execute the contract

STD: Positive interaction between

Contractor and

Government 95% of the time, with reasonable and cooperative behavior in problem identification and corrective actions.

AQL: Any discrepancies are corrected within

COR specified timelines.

Joint review with Contractor, Base Contract

COR, Task

CORs, and Test

Director

Ratings input in CPARS for retrieval by all

Government agencies.

Management continued

Maintain qualified key personnel

STD: Contracted positions filled with qualified personnel 95% of the time.

AQL: Ability to rapid fill vacancies with…