Attachment 7 - QASP 542_18_104 Steam Oval 1.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Location: Coatesville VAMC 542-18-104 Replace Steam and Condensate Oval 1

Revised: 10/3/2022

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) for project 542-1 8 - 1 0 4 R e p l a c e S t e a m a n d C o n d e n s a t e O v a l 1 .

This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Veteran’s Affairs Master Specification 01 45 00 Contractor Quality Control. The VHA will use the methods outlined in this specification in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

This is a three-phase model which will be comprised of prepatory, initial, and follow-up phases.

The method is meeting-intensive, and the onus falls onto the contractor to complete quality control.

The contractor shall appoint and dedicated quality control representative. The government will conduct measures to complete quality assurance; the contractor is responsible for quality control.

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 the government to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS 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. The COR will keep their own daily logs for documentation purposes. These document personnel, safety, and work performed on a daily basis.

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. The contractor shall have a designated quality control officer for this contract. 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 QC Plan 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 system shall closely mirror Specification 01 45 00:

Prepatory Phase. This phase occurs before execution of a definable feature of work is started. Defineable features of work will be approved by the COR prior to any work beginning. The prep meeting will be run by the contractor. Topics during the meeting will include specification review, schedule for the work, safety, and outstanding RFI. This meeting shall occur before the work is started; failure to do so will result in administrative action by the government and possible stoppage of work. The prepatory meeting shall be shown on the project schedule. Reference VA Master Specification 01 45 00 paragraph 3.6(A)(1).

Initial Phase. This phase includes initial inspection of the definable feature of work. This occurs when 10- 20% of work is completed. The purpose is to ensure that the work is being completed in a satisfactory manner as well as in accordance with the specifications and drawings. Refer to paragraph 3.6(A)(2) in specification 01 45 00.

Follow-up phase. This phase is the continuous inspection and spot checking of work to ensure work is completed. Refer to 3.6(A)(3) in 01 45 00.

1.3.2 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 retainage 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 COR, ACOR, Chief Engineer, and the contractor. The CO will designate one primary and one alternate COR as the government authorities for performance management. The CO will incorporate feedback from the Chief Engineer and any ACOs assigned to the contract. 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 (daily reports) 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.

2.3 The Chief Engineer, Supervisory Projects Manager, Subject Matter Experts

The Chief Engineer and Supervisory Projects Manager shall provide CORs technical and administrative directions as outlined in the QASP, project specifications, and general supervisory duties. These are included but not limited to determinations on material storage, schedule, technical quality, safety, and engineering matters. These parties will primarily communicate through the COR. These parties are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf (unless warranted by the CO). Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action.

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the SOW and the project specifications. Specs include but are not limited to: 01 42 19 and 01 42 29. Individual quality standards are listed within the specifications. If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on 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:

Initial and follow up inspections as noted above

Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COTR/COR designated inspector.

100% Inspection – Each month, the COTR/COR, shall review the generated documentation and enter summary results into the Surveillance Activity Checklist.

Periodic Inspection – COTR/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. For the purpose of this contract, the government is the customer. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction.

For this section, those government employees benefitting or using the end product are considered the users. User satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through user complaints.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer and user focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints, as well as and investigating the issues and/or problems. The user always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR, as opposed to the contractor.

User 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.

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 are contained within construction specifications and the associated reference standards. These consist of ASTM, ACI, and other standards for construction. These ensure contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. This occurs in the pre-construction conference. Performance standards are expressed in the and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques in this QASP.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR will be reported using internal documents such as government daily reports, prepatory meeting minutes, and reviews of testing reports. 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 (VA daily reports).

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. Failure to meet the AQL may result in a deduction/retainage from the monthly payment, in accordance with the FAR.

6.1.2 At the end of each month, the contractor will prepare a written report for the COR 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, 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.

6.2 Reviews and Resolution

6.2.1 The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO, ACO, Chief Engineer, 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 contractor PM 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

6.2.2 The QAR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

6.2.3 The CO/COR 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.

ATTACHMENT 1: SAMPLE PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Required Services (Tasks)

Performance Standards

Acceptable Quality Levels

Methods of

Surveillance

Incentive (Positive and/or Negative)

(Impact on Contractor Payments)

EXAMPLES:

Submit a PM report of scheduled, completed, and outstanding tasks monthly (PWS C.2.1.2 (G))

Administer quality control program including subcontractor management in accordance with QCP

Submit management reports as required

100% of reports accurately depict current status

Contractor is in compliance with QCP 97% of the time

99%

95%

File reviews, periodic inspections, and random, observations, customer complaints

File reviews, periodic inspections, and random, observations, customer complaints

None

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: _________________