36C77618Q9237-002.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

WORKFORCE MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTING OFFICE

HR DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRAM EVALUATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page ii of 10

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) for the Human Resources (HR) Development and Program Evaluation requirement. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Department of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Program Contract Activity – Central (PCAC), Office of Workforce Management and Consulting (WMC) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

Purpose 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 PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the project, 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.

Performance Management Approach The PWS 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 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.

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.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

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 Program Manager (PM) and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time contracting officer’s representative (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.

The Contracting Officer’s Representative The (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.

IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the PWS. 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 the incentive (positive and/or negative) detailed in the Performance Requirements Summary.

METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

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 (include those that apply)

· Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the PM/COR/CO designated inspector.

· 100% Inspection – The PM/COR/CO, shall review the generated documentation

· Periodic Inspection – PM/COR/CO performs the periodic inspection, if needed.

· 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 PM and COR, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

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 critical activities, the desired performance level is established at 100%. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance.

QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

The Performance Management Feedback Loop The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1.

ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

Determining Performance 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.

Reviews and Resolution The CO may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the COR and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The CO 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 and 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

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

The PM 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 CO.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

and /or Negative)

Note 1: Significant errors or omissions are defined as deliverables not meeting the intent of the task and the work considered to be within scope of this order.

Note 2: Continued repetitive errors may result in an unacceptable rating on performance report to be used as part of the evaluation criteria on future order competition.

Late Deliverables and/or Significant Errors or Omissions shall be handled in the following manner:

The above QASP is only a sample and may change based on what the Contractor(s) submit in their proposed approach.

Late deliverables:

a. Deliverables must be provided on the dates specified. Any changes to the delivery date must have prior approval (in writing) by the PM/CO or designate at least five business days prior to the deliverable due date

b. If the deliverable cannot be provided within the scheduled time frame, the Vendor is required to contact the Project Manager/Contract Manager in writing with a reason for the delay and the proposed revised schedule. The request for a revised schedule must include the impact on related tasks and the overall project

c. A request for a revised schedule must be reviewed and approved by the PM/CO before placed in effect. Contract Terms and Conditions may dictate penalties, costs, and other actions based on the facts related to the request for a revised schedule

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):

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________

ATTACHMENT 3: QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM CUSTOMER

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION

(Leave blank until there is a complaint) SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

RESULTS OF COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION:

DATE/TIME SERVICE PROVIDER INFORMED OF COMPLAINT: CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN BY SERVICE PROVIDER:

RECEIVED AND VALIDATED BY:

PREPARED BY: DATE: