Attachment QASP.pdf

PDF 265 KB Posted

Attached to
Q522--Carroll CBOC X-Ray Services Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
36C26324Q0181
Issued by
Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration Veterans Integrated Service Network 23

About this file

This document outlines a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for radiology services at a Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic. The QASP defines performance standards and acceptable quality levels for key metrics including timely delivery of images, qualifications of personnel, patient wait times, billing timeliness and accuracy, and HIPAA compliance. Performance will be monitored through methods such as periodic inspections of patient files, customer complaint tracking, and verification of staff credentials. Contractors will be assigned ratings of exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory for each metric based on achieving the defined acceptable quality levels. The QASP establishes procedures for documenting performance, notifying contractors of deficiencies, and developing corrective action plans to ensure contractual requirements are met.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Q522--Carroll CBOC X-Ray Services, newest first.
File Type Posted
Solicitation Amendment 36C26324Q0181 0002.pdf PDF
Copy of SCHEDULE RFQ Amendment 2.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
36C26324Q0181 0002_1.docx DOCX document
Solicitation Amendment 36C26324Q0181 0001.pdf PDF
36C26324Q0181 0001_1.docx DOCX document
36C26324Q0181_1.docx DOCX document
P07 Wage Determination.pdf PDF
Solicitation 36C26324Q0181.pdf PDF

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 (QASP)

The contractor will be evaluated in accordance with the following:

1. PURPOSE

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 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.

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 through contract modification. 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 (CO) – The CO 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 CO shall also assure 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.

Organization or Agency:

b. 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. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: see the COR delegation memo

Organization or Agency: VA Central Iowa Health Care System, Imaging Service

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

The following employee(s) of the contractor serve as the contractor’s program manager(s) for this contract.

Primary:

Alternate:

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The contractor is responsible for performance of ALL terms and conditions of the contract. CORs will provide contract progress reports quarterly to the CO reflecting performance on this plan and all other aspects of the resultant contract. The performance standards outlined in this QASP shall be used to determine the level of contractor performance in the elements defined.

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine the level of Contractor performance to these standards.

The Performance Requirements are listed below in Section 6. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the standard and assign a rating. At the end of the performance period, these ratings will be used, in part, to establish the past performance of the contractor on the contract.

5. 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.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. 100% surveillance: N/A

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. Five (5) randomly selected patient files will be reviewed per inspection period. All inspections and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA Privacy and Information security standards.

c. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. Customer complaints as a result of contact from the VA patient advocates will be used in QA surveillance. Press Ganey survey results will be also utilized in QA surveillance as a form of customer feedback.

d. RANDOM SAMPLING. N/A

e. Verification and/or documentation provided by Contractor. Require the contractor to provide documentation of technologist’s credentials and competency checklists.

6. SAMPLE QASP PERFORMANCE REPORT DATE: __________________

Measures PWS

Reference

Performance

Requirement

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Surveillance

Method

Met AQL/DID NOT MEET AQL-

CPAR RATING/ADD COMMENTS

1-Delivery of images to authorized government system or representative

4.0 All imaging studies

must be delivered to the VA CBOC in a timely manner.

Within 24 hours for routine exams and 1 hour for urgent exams.

98% Periodic Inspection

2 - Qualifications of Key Personnel

2.1 Contractor’s

Technical staff

All (100%) Contractor’s technical staff are registered by the American Registry of Radiologic

100% Verification of documentation provided by the contractor

3- Patient Access 4.0 Patient wait time shall not exceed 30 minutes.

All (100%) Contractor’s physicians (s) are on time and available to perform services.

Technical staff are available to begin patient exam within 30 minutes of check in time. 98 %of the time

Validated Customer Complaints

4 – Timeliness and accuracy of Billing

6.2.1 Invoices to be

received in a timely manner and no re-work needed.

All invoices to be received in Tungsten within 14 days past the end of the month.

99% of invoices received timely and with accurate information.

Periodic Inspection

5 - Privacy, Confidentiality and

HIPAA

4.1.3 Contractor is aware

of all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA and complies with all standards Zero breaches of

All (100%) Contractor’s physician (s) comply with all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, 100%compliance;

Periodic Inspection.

privacy or confidentiality

Confidentiality and

HIPAA

7. CPAR RATINGS ASSIGNED TO QASP ITEMS:

Metrics and methods are designed to determine rating for a given standard and acceptable quality level. The following ratings shall be used (Reference: CPARS User Manual https://www.cpars.gov/documents/CPARS-Guidance.pdf:

EXCEPTIONAL: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the 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.

VERY GOOD:

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the 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.

SATISFACTORY: Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

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.

MARGINAL:

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

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).

UNSATISFACTORY:

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery 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 Reports, or letters).

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

https://www.cpars.gov/documents/CPARS-Guidance.pdf

a. The Government shall document positive and/or negative performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action and preparing annual past performance using CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT REPORT (CPAR).

b. If contractor performance does not meet the Acceptable Quality level, the CO shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the CO shall document the discussion and place it in the contract file. When the COR and the CO determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Report (CR), and present it to CO. The CO will in turn review and will present to the contractor's program manager for corrective action.

The Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CR in writing. The CR 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 CR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the CO. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. The CO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance and the acceptability of the Contractor’s corrective action plan.

Any CRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CO. See Sample CR on the following page.

9. COR AND CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QASP

SIGNED:

COR NAME/TITLE DATE

SIGNED:

CONTRACTOR NAME/TITLE DATE

CONTRACT REPORT

1. CONTRACT NUMBER 2. REPORT NUMBER FOR THIS DISCREPANCY

3. TO: (Contracting Officer) 4. FROM: (Name of COR)

5. DATES

a. CR PREPARED

b. RETURNED BY CONTRACTOR: c. ACTION COMPLETE

6. Issue Identified (Describe in detail. Include reference to PWS Directive; attach continuation sheet if necessary.)

7. SIGNATURE OF COR Date:

8. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER Date:

9a. TO (Contracting Officer) 9a. FROM (Contractor)

10. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE AS TO CAUSE AND ACTIONS TO PREVENT RECURRENCE. (Cite applicable quality control program procedures or new procedures. Attach continuation sheet(s) if necessary.)

11. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE Date:

12. GOVERNMENT EVALUATION.

13. GOVERNMENT ACTIONS

14. CLOSE OUT

NAME TITLE SIGNATURE DATE

CONTRACTOR

NOTIFIED

COR

CONTRACTING

OFFICER

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.
a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. 100% surveillance: N/A
b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. Five (5) randomly selected patient files will be reviewed per inspection period. All inspections and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA ...
c. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. Customer complaints as a result of contact from the VA patient advocates will be used in QA surveillance. Press Ganey survey results will be also utilized in QA surveillance as a form of customer feedback.
d. RANDOM SAMPLING. N/A
e. Verification and/or documentation provided by Contractor. Require the contractor to provide documentation of technologist’s credentials and competency checklists.
a. The Government shall document positive and/or negative performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action and preparing annual past performance using CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CPAR).

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .