36C77619R0010-007.pdf

QASP Template

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Office of Health Informatics Clinical Informatics and Data Management Office (CIDMO)

Human Factors Engineering (HFE)

Human Factors Services

Date: 23 April 2019 QASP Version Number: 1.0

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Version History

Template Version #

Version Description Release Date

Initial Release Apr 23, 2019

THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT GET INCORPORATED INTO THE

CONTRACT/ORDER; IT IS USED BY GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES TO

MONITOR PERFORMANCE AND THE GOVERNMENT HAS THE RIGHT TO

CHANGE ITS METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE AT ANY TIME. THE CO/COR SHOULD

PROVIDE A COPY TO THE CONTRACTOR THROUGH CORRESPONDENCE.

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

For: Human Factors Services

Contract/Order Number: Blank until contract/order award

Contract/Order Description: Coordination Support Services to provide the outreach and coordination infrastructure necessary for successful nationwide deployment and implementation of Human Factors Services

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

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. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

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 Clinical Informatics and Data

Management Office (CIDMO) Human Factors Engineering (HFE) 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. 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: Charles E. Holmes, Contracting Officer Organization: Department of Veterans Affairs, Program Contracting Activity Central

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 D. Rivera

c. Other Key Government Personnel – Kurt Ruark

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

a. Program Manager – To be completed at award

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

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The Government will utilize a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) throughout the life of the contract to ensure that the Contractor is performing the services required by this PWS in an acceptable manner. The Government reserves the right to alter or change the surveillance methods in the QASP at its own discretion.

The Contractor shall perform the tasks and complete the associated deliverables under this task order by the scheduled due dates within the overall period of performance. If the Contractor cannot deliver those deliverables specified by this task order by the required due date, then the Contractor shall provide a written explanation to the Contracting Officer (CO) within one (1) business day of the deliverable due date. This written transmittal shall include the reasons for the delay; when the Contractor knew or should have known a delay would incur; due diligence taken to mitigate the problems, the impact on the overall project; and a firm commitment of when the work is to be completed.

The Government will have ten (10) business days to review each deliverable and provide feedback/comments. The contractor shall have five (5) business days to incorporate feedback/comments and make appropriate revisions. The contractor shall provide the revised version of each deliverable to the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and VA Program Manager (VA PM). The COR will review and determine final acceptance by the Government.

The COR will notify the contractor of final acceptance within five (5) business days.

The contractor shall be responsible for adhering to all pertinent VA standards including but not limited to ensuring that all documentation and deliverables are stored on appropriate VA servers within one week of their completion. The contractor shall use the VA Nationwide Teleconferencing System (VANTS) for all pertinent conference calls, and the VA Exchange server for all pertinent email. Upon assignment of VA email accounts, use of external email accounts for the purpose of VA communications and business will be prohibited. The contractor shall be responsible for adhering to all pertinent VA information technology policies and procedures, which will be made available at the contractor’s request on award.

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

1st Attempt Meets or exceeds all acceptable quality levels and expectations of task/ deliverable 2nd Attempt Does not meet all acceptable quality levels and expectations of task/ deliverable:

5 days to remedy and resubmit.

3rd Attempt Does not meet all acceptable quality levels and expectations of task/ deliverable:

3 days to remedy and resubmit with 5% deduction off line item price 4th Attempt Does not meet all acceptable quality levels and expectations of task/ deliverable:

1 day to remedy and resubmit with 10% off line item price 5th Attempt Does not meet all acceptable quality levels and expectations of task/ deliverable: The Government may not accept a deliverable that does not meet all acceptable quality levels and expectations of task/ deliverable after the 5th round of revisions from a Contractor. The contract in whole or part may be terminated for cause for failure to perform.

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

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

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.

The Performance Metrics for Deliverables and Performance Standards are outlined in Section 6 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The schedule of deliverables is outlined in Section B 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. (Evaluates all outcomes.)

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

2. 100% INSPECTION

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.

3. Random Sample

a. 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.

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

a. 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.

5. On-Site Surveillance

a. Each quarter, the COR shall review and document findings from an on-site surveillance 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 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 ***

EXCELLEN

T 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