QASP Water Sampling and Testing.pdf
PDF 219 KB Posted
- Attached to
- H999--Water Sampling & Monitoring Services
- Solicitation number
- 36C24125Q0845
About this file
This document is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) template for Contract 402-25-203SC AAMI ST108 Testing (25-30), issued by VA ME HCS (Veterans Affairs Maine Healthcare System). The QASP outlines the government's approach to monitoring and evaluating contractor performance, with a focus on results-based assessment rather than strict process compliance. Key performance requirements include collecting samples according to provided frequency and schedule, presenting sampling results within 5 business days, supplying sample materials and mailers, and responding to urgent sampling calls within 24 hours. The plan establishes acceptable quality levels of 99% for each performance standard, with surveillance methods including file reviews, periodic inspections, random observations, and customer complaints. Performance will be recorded on Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and monitored monthly by the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), with potential incentives or deductions based on meeting or failing to meet performance standards.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C24125Q0845 0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| Price Breakdown Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| QUESTION AND ANSWERS.pdf | ||
| 36C24125Q0845.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)
TEMPLATE
402-25-203SC AAMI ST108 Testing (25-30)
Issued TBD at time of award
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
1.2 Performance Management Approach
1.3 Performance Management Strategy
2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1 The Contracting Officer
2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative
3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS
4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE
4.1 Surveillance Techniques
4.2 Customer Feedback
4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels
5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION
5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop
5.2 Monitoring Forms
6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
6.1 Determining Performance
6.2 Reporting
6.3 Reviews and Resolution
ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY
ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM
QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN
(QASP)
1 INTRODUCTION
This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (SOW) entitled 402-25-203SC AAMI ST108 Testing (FY25-30). This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines VA ME HCS will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.
1.1 Purpose
1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the
SOW and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.
1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team
(IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.
1.2 Performance Management Approach
1.2.1 The SOW structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by VA ME HCS to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the SOW are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.
1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law
(federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.
1.3 Performance Management Strategy
1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the SOW. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the
SOW. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.
1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.
2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1 The Contracting Officer
The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the contracting officer's representative (COR), and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time COR, as the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.
2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative
The contracting officer’s representative (COR) is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the
CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract.
3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY
LEVELS
The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the SOW and in Attachment 1, “Performance Requirements Summary.” If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract. If the contractor exceeds the service or performance level, it is eligible to receive an incentive or award fee as stated in the contract. Failure to meet the required service or performance level will result in a deduction from the monthly amount.
4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE
4.1 Surveillance Techniques
In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance are
➢ Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR and stakeholders/end users.
➢ 100% Inspection – Each month, the COR/COR, shall review the generated documentation and enter summary results into the Surveillance Activity Checklist.
➢ Periodic Inspection – COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.
4.2 Customer Feedback
The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.
Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR, as opposed to the contractor.
Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint
Investigation, identified in Attachment 3.
Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.
4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels
The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary
Table, for contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. For certain critical activities such as those involving Dialysis, Endo and SPS, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent.
5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION
5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop
The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes.
Performance standards are expressed in the SOW and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1.
5.2 Monitoring Forms
The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments 2 and 3. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved.
5.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.
6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT
6.1 Determining Performance
6.1.1 Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.
6.2 Reporting
6.2.1 At the end of each month, the [insert title of person who will prepare the report – COR, COR, ACO, QAR, or PM] will prepare a written report for the [insert title of government representative responsible for overall monitoring of performance – COR, COR, ACO, QAR, or PM] summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the contractor’s submitted monthly report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2), will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.
6.3 Reviews and Resolution
6.3.1 The COR/CS/CO may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the COR/CS/CO and other government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:
➢ Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis
➢ Issues and concerns of both parties
➢ Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis
➢ Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness
➢ Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes
6.3.2 The COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.
6.3.3 The COR/CS/CO and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action.
Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented.
Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the PCO/ACO.
Commented [KA1]: Where is the monthly report called for from contractor
ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY
Required Services
(Tasks)
Performance
Standards
Acceptable
Quality
Levels
Methods of
Surveillance
Incentive (Positive and/or Negative)
(Impact on
Contractor
Payments)
Collect samples per frequency and schedule provided
Present results from sampling within 5 business days of receipt of water sample.
Supply sample materials and mailers for self-collected samples.
Respond to urgent emergent
Event/Incident sampling calls within
24 hours of call.
100% sample collection
100% result reporting
100% material availability
100% response rate
99%
File reviews, periodic inspections, and random, observations, customer complaints.
and random, observations, and random, observations, and random, observations, Recorded on CPARs
ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE
MONITORING FORM
SERVICE or STANDARD:
SURVEY PERIOD:
SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):
Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint
LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):
Monthly Quarterly As needed
PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:
Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%
Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards
Does Not Meet Standards
Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:
PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .