36C25619Q0881-010.doc

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN (IPM)

G.V. (SONNY) MONTGOMERY VA MEDICAL CENTER

JACKSON, MS

1.

INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan has been developed to evaluate Contractor performance while implementing and executing Performance Work Statement (PWS) tasks/deliverables for this requirement. It is designed to provide an effective surveillance method for monitoring and evaluating the Contractor’s performance for the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. 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 will accomplish the work that is required by the PWS. Rather, this QASP has been 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 to ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. However, the Government will coordinate changes with the Contractor (if changes are required). Copies of the original QASP and revisions will be provided to the Contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

2.

OBJECTIVE

The foundation of this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is derived from the Objective of this requirement which is the following: The contractor shall provide all supervision, management, laboratory testing, tools, supplies, equipment, transportation, and labor to develop and implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan for the G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery VA Medical Center located at 1500 E. Woodrow Wilson Drive, Jackson, MS 39216. The implementation of an IPM shall be done in a manner that ensures the health and general well-being of patients, staff, and visitors. Such a plan must also include structural and procedural variations that reduce the food, water, harborage, and access used by pests. Contractor’s IPM shall also offer surveillance, trapping, pesticide application, pest removal components, and applicable reporting along with detailed, site-specific recommendations for structural and technical alterations, for pest control indoor and outdoor, within the property boundaries of the buildings.

3.

GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following Government personnel are responsible for overseeing and coordinating surveillance activities.

1). Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and is responsible for ensuring proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR is responsible for keeping a quality assurance file and after the contract, or when requested by the CO, providing corresponding documentation to the CO. 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 CO for action.

2). Contracting Officer (CO)

The CO is responsible for ensuring performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensuring compliance with the contract terms, and safeguarding the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The CO is responsible for ensuring that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance.

Upon award or before the performance period start date of the contract the individuals who will be involved in the execution of this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) will be identified.

4.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (MEASURES). Contractor performance will be rated/evaluated by the COR or other authorized designee using the following metrics in the table below. The contractor’s performance under the terms and conditions of this contract will be based on how successfully the contractor executes the tasks/deliverables listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). At a minimum, the contractor must complete the required tasks that contained within the Performance Work Statement for this requirement.

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP) INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN (IPM)

G.V. (SONNY) MONTGOMERY VA MEDICAL CENTER JACKSON, MS

Disincentives for Meeting/ Not Meeting AQL

Incentive/Disincentives for Meeting/Not Meeting AQL

1. Positive and negative performance will be documented locally (contract file) and/or in the appropriate contractor performance assessment reporting system/database.

2. Noncompliance to contract standards will be corrected at no cost to the government. The government reserves the right and may elect to measure/document negative performance through utilization of a performance report and/or a contract discrepancy report

3. The contractor shall respond in writing to the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) to all notifications of failure to meet acceptable quality levels within 5 days of issuance by the Contracting Officer Representative and/or the Contracting Officer. The contractor’s response shall include the corrective action taken to rectify the problem and the proposed measure to preclude the recurrence of the problem.

The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix includes performance standards. The Government will use these standards to determine Contractor performance and will compare Contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

5.

RATINGS

Metrics and methods are designed to determine rating for a given standard and acceptable quality level. Metrics and methods are also designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. The following ratings shall be used:

Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Note: To justify an Exceptional rating, you should identify multiple significant events in each category and state how it was a benefit to the GOVERNMENT. However a singular event could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Note: To justify a Very Good rating, you should identify a significant event in each category and state how it was a benefit to the GOVERNMENT. Also there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Note: To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. Also there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Note: To justify Marginal performance, you should identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the GOVERNMENT. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g,. Management, Quality, Safety or Environmental Deficiency Report or letter).

is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Note: To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, you should identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the GOVERNMENT. However, a singular problem could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g. Management, Quality, Safety or Environmental Deficiency

6.

DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. ACCEPTABLE Performance.

The Government will document positive performance.

b. UNACCEPTABLE performance.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR will inform the Contractor. This notification will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. Formal reporting may be done through generation of a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) if the issue cannot be rectified by other means.

When the COR determines that formal written communication and reporting is required the COR will prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and will present it to the appropriate Contractor representative.

The Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the Contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the Contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the Contractor must present this corrective action plan back to the COR. The Government will review the Contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, other non-payment actions, or other actions deemed necessary by the CO.

7.

FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

a. Frequency of Measurement.

During contract performance, the COR will take periodic measurements as specified in the AQL column of the Performance Standards Summary Matrix, and will analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

APPENDIX A – PERFORMANCE REPORT

Performance Report < This template will be used to formally document surveillance. >

1. CONTRACT NUMBER: <insert number>

2. Prepared by: (Name of COR) <insert name>

3. Date and time of observation:

4. Observation:

<Examples of items to include in a report are:

- Method of surveillance.

- How frequently you conducted surveillance.

- Surveillance results.

- Number of observations.> Prepared by: <Enter COR’s name>

Signature – Contracting Officer Representative

Date

APPENDIX B– CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT

Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR)

< This template will be used to formally document discrepancies. >

1. Contract Number: <insert number>

2. TO: (Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative) <insert name>

3. FROM: (Name of COR) <insert name>

4. Date and time observed discrepancy:

5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM:

<Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.>

6. Corrective action plan:

A written corrective action plan < is / is not > required.

< If a written corrective action plan is required include the following. > The written Corrective Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than < # days after receipt of this

CDR. >

Prepared by: <Enter COR’s name>

Signature – Contracting Officer Representative

Received by:

Signature - Contractor Representative