36C77619Q0108-002.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

VHA Office of Health Informatics (OHI)

Services for VHA Governance Support

Date:

Office of Health Informatics

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

For: VHA Governance Support

Contract/Order Number: Blank until contract/order award

Contract/Order Description: Specifically, the functional task areas that shall be supported by this PWS are: the Investment Governance Services (IGS), Strategic Investment Management Office (SIM) under OHI which provides oversight of budget planning activities relative to VHA IT needs, coordinates IT governance functions within VHA, and provides VHA liaison to VA-wide governance. OHI plays an extensive role in the formulation and coordination of business owner input into the VA IT budget formulation process and IT coordination. OHI also represents the IT needs of the VHA program offices, the Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs), and VA medical centers (VAMC) in governance boards within IT and VHA. IGS works collaboratively with other VHA Program Offices, offices in OHI, and other VA Program offices to provide budget analysis at the program and project level to support Healthcare IT.

Contractor’s Name: Blank until contract/order award

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to monitor Contractor performance. This QASP describes:

• What will be monitored

• How monitoring will take place

• Who will conduct the monitoring

• How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the Contractor and Government officials responsible for surveillance activities. The Government can change the method of surveillance at any time.

1.1 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

The PWS sets forth “what” service is required as well as the performance standards associated with that task, 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 Office Health Informatics (OHI) to monitor the Contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance standards 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 to what extent the 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. Required processes are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus by the Government provides the Contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract/order as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

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/order regardless of whether the work is performed by Contractor employees or by Subcontractors. The Contractor’s QC Program (QCP) will set forth the procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The Contractor will implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative.

The government representative(s) will monitor performance by the Contractor to determine how the Contractor is performing against performance standards. The Contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively. The Contractor will be monitored and assessed throughout the period of performance of the contract/order as to either meeting or not meeting the performance thresholds stated in the Performance Metrics Section of the PWS (Section 6.3). The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will perform quarterly assessments. The Performance Based Service Assessment Survey, or other method, may be used to document this assessment. A sample Performance Based Service Assessment Survey is provided at the end of this document. When a Contractor performance issue occurs, the COR will notify the Program Manager and Contracting Officer (CO). The COR/CO will engage the Contractor PM to resolve the discrepancy.

1.2.1 PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK:

At the end of each assessment period, the assessment will be reviewed by the Program Manager and CO. The COR/CO will notify the Contractor of the results no later than 15 working days after the end of the assessment period.

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/order 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/order. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO:

Organization:

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract/order and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. This file shall contain all quality assessment reports. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: Luz Rivera, OHI

c. Other Key Government Personnel – Denise Zibura, Back-up COR

3. Contractor Representatives

a. Program Manager – To be completed at award; if any (name and title)

b. Other Contractor Personnel – To be completed at award; if any (name and title)

4. Performance Standards

Performance Standards define required performance for specific tasks. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the Contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards.

The Performance Metrics for Deliverables and Performance Standards are outlined in Section 6.3 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The schedule of deliverables is outlined in Section B9 of the contract/order. The Government may utilize the Performance Based Service Assessment Survey, provided at the end of this document, or other method to compare Contractor performance to the Acceptable Levels of Performance (ALPs).

5. Methods of QA Surveillance

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use any or several of the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

1. 100% INSPECTION (of a Specific type of Deliverable) in a Specific Area

a. Each quarter, the COR shall review the Contractor’s performance/generated documentation and document your results accordingly. This assessment shall be placed in the COR’s QA file.

2. Random Sample

b. Each quarter, the COR shall review a random sampling of the Contractor’s performance/generated documentation and document your results accordingly. This assessment shall be placed in the COR’s QA file.

3. Validated Customer Complaint or Validated Below Average Acceptable Level of Performance (ALP) in a Specific Area

c. Each quarter, the COR shall review the Contractor’s performance/generated documentation corresponding to a validated customer complaint or validated inability to perform in accordance with the ALP in a specific area and document your results accordingly. This assessment shall be placed in the COR’s QA file.

6. ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE (ALP)

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and ALP.

The ALPs are included in the Performance Metrics Section of the PWS for Contractor performance and are structured to allow the Contractor to manage how the work is performed, while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

7. INCENTIVES

The Government shall consider the Contractor’s performance when making a determination to exercise any options.

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. Acceptable Performance

The Government shall document acceptable performance accordingly. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action.

b. Unacceptable performance

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the CO. This will always be in writing although when circumstances necessitate immediate verbal communication, that communication will be followed in writing. The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the CO determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the Contractor's program manager.

The Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing to the CO. The CDR will state how long after receipt the Contractor has to take corrective action. The CDR will also 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 CO shall review the Contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CO.

9. Frequency of Measurement

a. Frequency of Measurement.

During contract/order performance, the COR will periodically analyze whether the negotiated frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed, and at a minimum shall be twice a year.

b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COR shall meet with the Contractor quarterly to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment to the CO.

Quality of submission should also be considered. See examples below. Error rates or resubmits for content flaws would be the measures associated with these standards.

• Accuracy - Work Products shall be accurate in presentation, technical content, and adhere to accepted elements of style.

• Clarity - Work Products shall be clear and concise. Any/All diagrams shall be easy to understand and be relevant to the supporting narrative.

• Consistency to Requirements - All work products must satisfy the requirements of this PWS.

• File Editing - All text and diagrammatic files shall be editable by the VA in Windows-based or Adobe environments/platforms.

• Format - Follow specified VA Directives or Manuals and/or best business practices.

• Presentations - Presentations shall be clear, concise, executive-focused, and written in plain, clear English with minimal jargon, understandable by lay persons.

The quality of deliverables directly contributes to organizational communications.

• Project Plan - Project Plan shall be comprehensive; recognize and address authority, perceptions, and concerns of stakeholders; incorporate scope of requisite requirements across the organization and/or agency.

• Reports - There shall be no omissions in the reports, documents or functional requirements.

• Publications and other documents - Deliverables shall be in formats appropriate to target audiences; user friendly, clear, thorough and comprehensive.

• Meeting support - Pre-meeting preparations and logistics; smooth meeting operations; comprehensive post-meeting summaries to include but not limited to:

Minutes, Action Items, Attendees, Program Objectives and Milestones and major decision points.

• Analyses and Assessments - Analyses and assessments are performed with accuracy, completeness and adherence to industry best practices.

• Obtain stakeholder input. Deliverables shall consist of the timely implementation of input mechanisms, and shall consist of an accurate and comprehensive synthesis of results and recommendations. Integration of relevant stakeholder input documented for deliverable.

The following rating definitions can be used as a guide when completing the Performance Based Service Assessment:

Performance Rating Criteria

Exceptional Performance meets all contractual requirements and exceeds most to the government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with almost no minor

Performance Rating Criteria problems for which corrective actions were taken by the contractor, and the corrective actions were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets all contractual requirements and exceeds some to the government’s benefit. The contractual performance element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with very few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

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.

Below Satisfactory 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.

Poor 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 contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

PERFORMANCE BASED SERVICE ASSESSMENT

CONTRACTOR: GOVERNMENT REQUIRING ACTIVITY

CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER/ TITLE:

PERIOD COVERED:

Place an X in the appropriate response

Performance Standards for Assessment Very ***Below ***

Excellent Good Satisfactory Satisfactory Poor

VALUE 5 4 3 2 1

A. MEETING TECHNICAL NEEDS:

1. What level of understanding does the contractor have of my technical needs and my mission requirements?

2. What level of efficiency and effectiveness does the contractor demonstrate in meeting my requirements?

3. Overall, how well does the contractor meet my technical needs and mission requirements?

4. Overall, the quality of the products/services provided are

B. PROJECT MILESTONES AND SCHEDULE:

1. How well does the contractor meet my established milestones and project dates?

2. How timely are products, reports, and invoices completed, reviewed, and delivered?

3. How would you assess the reasonableness of cost of the services being provided and the accuracy of submitted invoice?

4. How well does the contractor notify me in advance about potential milestones and scheduling problems so that I have enough time to correct them?

C. PROJECT STAFFING

1. How current is the expertise of those contractors performing requested tasks?

2. Do contractor personnel possess the necessary knowledge, skills and ability to accomplish assigned tasks?

3. Are the staffing levels assigned by contractor appropriate for accomplishing the mission?

D. VALUE OF THE CONTRACTOR:

1. How would you assess the value of the services provided by the contractor?

2. How do you rate the quality of the products delivered by the contractor?

3. What overall rating would you give to the contractor's performance?

** Ratings for a Performance Standard are calculated by adding the individual scores under a Performance Standard and dividing it by the number of sub-standards under that Performance Standard.

***Poor and Below Satisfactory ratings must be explained in Section II (Narrative Clarification) below. Must be supportive and objective

II NARRATIVE

CLARIFICATION

(USE ADDITIONAL SPACE

AS REQUIRED)

Typed Name And Title of Government Project Lead/ Date