Attachment 29 FWS-I QASP.docx
DOCX document 37 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Family of Weapon Sight – Individual (FWS-I) Full Rate Production Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W91CRB-21-R-0012
About this file
This document outlines a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for the Family of Weapon Sights - Individual (FWS-I) full rate production contract solicitation. The Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving Ground is soliciting proposals to produce the FWS-I, which is an uncooled, lightweight infrared imaging device used for target acquisition on individual weapons. The QASP defines performance standards and monitoring methods for areas such as schedule adherence, program management, and system performance. It designates contracting personnel roles and responsibilities, and describes how performance will be assessed, documented, and incentivized through ratings including exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, and unsatisfactory. Acceptable and unacceptable performance will be documented in reports and discrepancy reports. Surveillance will occur periodically according to a defined frequency.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 46
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN
Family of Weapons Sights – Individual (FWS-I)
Contract Numbers: TBD
| Contract Description: | TBD (IDIQ Best Value Multiple Vendor Award) | |
| PoP: [Insert Dates] |
The Family of Weapon Sights-Individual (FWS-I) system is a weapon mounted long-wave infrared sensor that provides imagery including a reticle bore-sighted to the host weapon (M4, M249, etc.) that can operate in battlefield conditions (daylight, night, and obscurants). The FWS-I system provides Rapid Target Acquisition (RTA) capability when combined with Enhanced Night Vision Goggle-Binocular (ENVG-B) or the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS). RTA is the ability to spatially align the weapon sight imagery, including reticle, with the user’s field of view and overlay it in the ENVG-B or IVAS display. This improves and enhances Soldier lethality, effectiveness, and survivability by reducing exposure to threat weapons.
Customer: Program Executive Office (PEO) Soldier, Department of Army, Other DoD organizations, and Foreign Military Sales (FMS).
1. PURPOSE.
This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contracts. This QASP explains the following:
· What will be monitored
· How monitoring will take place
· Who will conduct the monitoring
· How monitoring efforts and results will be documented
This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.
This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.
2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.
a. Contracting Officer (KO) - 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 assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.
Assigned KO: Peter P. Buckless Organization or Agency: ACC-APG Telephone: (410) 278-5414 Email: peter.p.buckless.civ@mail.mil
b. Contract Specialist (KS) – Gerald “Jerry” Simmons Michael F. Siwek Organization or Agency: ACC-APG Telephone: (410) 278-3876 Email: gerald.a.simmons2.civ@mail.mil
c. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the KO, the COR shall provide documentation to the KO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the KO for action.
COR: Felecia Mootry Telephone: (703) 704-0039 Email: felecia.l.mootry2.civ@mail.mil
COR: Nathan G. Heslink Telephone: (703) 704-1372 Email: nathan.g.heslink.civ@mail.mil
3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES:
The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task Manager for this contract.
(Company) Program Manager:
Telephone:
Email:
Task Manager:
Telephone:
Email:
4. 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 in the Performance Specification(s) listed in the Statement of Work (SOW) are the basis of the performance standards. The Government shall use these standards to determine the contractor’s performance.
Program Schedule, Cost control/Program Management and System Performance will be monitored. ALL requirements in the Performance Specification will be monitored for compliance.
5. INCENTIVES.
The Government shall use performance as incentive. Incentive shall be based on exceeding, meeting, or not meeting performance standards.
6. 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.
Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard.
6.1 Schedule
• Progress or status meetings.
Adherence to Major Milestones and system deliveries per SOW will be monitored.
• Analysis of contractor's progress reports.
The Integrated Program Management Reports (IPMR) will be monitored for the Progress/Management of the program Schedule for the effective period of performance.
6.2 Program Management
• Analysis of contractor's progress reports.
The Integrated Program Management Reports (IPMR) will be monitored for the effective period of performance.
6.3 Performance
• Performance reporting.
Contractor and Government Testing results will be monitored to evaluate systems performance against the requirements in the contractors Performance Specification.
Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the Contract becomes the basis for the KO’s actions.
7. RATINGS.
Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. The following ratings shall be used:
A numerical scale with numbers 1 through 10 where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent will be used to rate performance.
| NUMERICAL SCALE |
| RATING |
| DESCRIPTION |
| 9-10 |
| EXCEPTIONAL: |
| Performance significantly exceeds contract requirements to the Government’s benefit. |
| 7-8 |
| VERY GOOD: |
| Performance regularly exceeds contract requirements to the Government’s benefit. |
| 5-6 |
| SATISFACTORY: |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. |
| 3-4 |
| MARGINAL: |
| Performance is borderline unacceptable. |
| 1-2 |
| UNSATISFACTORY: |
| Performance does not meet contractual requirements. |
8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.
ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.
The Government shall document positive performance. A report template is attached. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee payments, award fee payments, or other actions.
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 a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and present it to the KO for further discussion and action. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.
Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.
9. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.
a. Frequency of Measurement.
During contract/order performance, the COR shall take periodic measurements and shall analyze if the frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.
b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.
The COR shall meet with the contractor Quarterly to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment.
Prepared by: Felecia Mootry
| ________________________________________ | ________________ |
| Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative | Date |
PERFORMANCE REPORT
Family of Weapon Sights – Individual (FWS-I)
1. CONTRACT NUMBER:
2. Prepared by:
3. Date and time of observation:
4. Observation:
- Method of surveillance.
- How frequently you conducted surveillance.
- Surveillance results.
- Number of observations.
| ________________________________________ | ________________ |
| Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative | Date |
CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)
Family of Weapon Sights - Individual
1. Contract Number:
2. TO (KO):
3. FROM (COR):
4. Date and time observed discrepancy:
5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM:
| ______________________________________ | ________________ | |
| Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative | Date |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .