Custom Search
|
|
|
||
 6-420 Evaluating The Quality Control of The Contractor's Work. First, it should
be understood that you cannot inspect quality into the work. No amount of
surveillance will produce the desired level of quality if the foundation for
quality performance was nut laid during the planning and specification
development phase of the procurement. Each significant contract requirement
must have a clearly defined performance requirement spelled out in the
specification. These performance requirements become the basis on which the
offerors prepare their bids/proposals, the framework within which the
successful contractor manages his work, and the criteria upon which the
Government assesses performance. Evaluating the quality of the contractor's
work becomes a process of making observations of the contractor's output
through a regimen of inspecting and comparing those inspection results with
the applicable performance requirement .
For the QAE, evaluating the quality of the contractor's work in this manner
is preparing the ground work for three major contract administration
responsibilities.
(a) Recommended equitable adjustments to the contract price for
services not provided or provided unsatisfactorily.
(b) Assisting in the preparation of performance evaluations for the
contractor.
(c) Recommending any of a number of administrative remedies as
appropriate for the circumstances .
Computing payment deductions (item (a) above) is a quantitative process.
All occurrences of nonperformed or unsatisfactory work are valued using the
schedule of deductions, schedule of prices or other contract provisions and
subtracted from the contract price as consideration for the services not
provided.
Preparing formal performance evaluations and monthly summaries of
performance (item (b) above), on the other hand, is a qualitative or
subjectiveprocess. There are no rules or formulas that will lead you to say
The custodial contractor's performance is unsatisfactory." That conclusion
is reached by a subjective assessment of the available evidence of the
contractor's performance.
Similarly, recommending that a contract discrepancy report (CDR) be issued
or stronger administrative remedy (item (c) above) be taken is a decision
reached by a subjective analysis of the inspection results and performance
trends. There is no uniform trigger point for these administrative steps
because there is a unique set of circumstances surrounding each activity and
each contract.
108
|
 
|
|
|
||
