47QFWA22R0008 Appendix L - QASP.pdf

APPENDIX L

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Solicitation 47QFWA22R0008

Department of Defense Medical Examination Review Board (DoDMERB) Medical Services Contract

01 February 2022

1.0 Introduction

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the DoDMERB Medical Services 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. In addition, the QASP will 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. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the Contractor. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the Contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

1.1 Project Objectives

The objective of this contract is to provide a network of Medical Providers and Optometric Providers within the U.S. and U.S. territories to complete an Initial Medical Examination (IME) and to complete or gather Additional Medical Services (AMS). Medical evaluations are divided into IMEs and AMSs. An IME consists of an optometric examination, hands-on medical examination, an audiometric screening, and potentially laboratory tests. A request for AMS represents services (consults and/or tests) that may be needed in addition to the information that was gathered during the IME. Not every AMS will require AMI, as many applicants are healthy enough to receive a determination without AMS. AMS requirements will be determined by DoDMERB after review of the IME.

1.2 Project Scope

• To complete an IME, the Health Care Provider must be a Licensed Independent Practitioner (LIP). Examples include:

• Medical Doctor (MD), Doctor of Osteopathy (DO), Doctor of Optometry (OD) or

• Nurse Practitioner (NP), or Physician Assistant (PA) if the provider is considered a LIP in their state of licensure/practice.

• NPs or PAs not considered LIPs in their state of licensure/practice shall have their exams counter-signed by a MD or DO.

• Optometrists or Ophthalmologists must be currently licensed and be in good standing.

• Specialists must be currently Board Certified in good standing in their specialty.

• Doctor of Psychology (PSYD’s) are acceptable for the conduct of behavioral/mental health AMS.

• Chiropractic physicians, and/or any other Chiropractic variant are NOT acceptable for any aspect of this contract.

Credentialing is NOT a requirement for this contract. Just verification and validation of licensing, Board Certifications when applicable, and assurance the provider is in good standing

AMS.

1.3 Quality Evaluation Areas

The Contractor will be evaluated in the following areas, at a minimum, as identified in FAR 42.1503(b)(2):

● Technical Performance (quality of product or service)

● Schedule and Timeliness of Deliveries

● Management or business relations

The primary client interface or Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will provide an independent performance evaluation and may rely on feedback in the evaluated areas from an Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representative (ACOR) and/or offices or directorates supported by the contractor personnel in the performance of this task. Any discrepancies will be brought to the attention of the Contracting Officer (CO).

1.3.1 Technical Performance

The Contractor will be evaluated monthly as to the quality of the output of its work and results will be documented in the COR’s file. The Contractor's personnel shall be technically competent in the tasks identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Included in the technical performance is the Contractor’s contribution in meetings and reviews, the quality of the

Contractor's technical reports, the Contractor's productivity and the overall quality of the technical support provided.

1.3.2 Schedule and Timeliness of Deliveries

The Contractor shall be responsive to Government taskings and submit its monthly reports, authorizations, brochure, etc. as required by the contract.

1.3.3 Contractor Cost Control

This is a firm fixed price contract. Cost control is not applicable.

1.3.4 Management of Business Relations

The Contractor shall put the appropriate effort in place to most efficiently perform the requirements provided in the PWS to the Government’s satisfaction and standards.

Quality Management Method

1.4 Quality Plan Processes

1.4.1 Quality Assurance

Quality Assurance (QA) activities will focus on the processes being used to manage and deliver the solution to evaluate overall project performance on a regular basis. QA will ensure the project satisfies the quality standards and will define and record quality reviews, test performance, and customer acceptance.

1.4.2 Quality Control

Quality Control (QC) activities will be performed by the Contractor to verify that project management and project deliverables are of high quality and meet quality standards. These standards are identified as part of the Contractor’s proposal.

1.5 Quality Standards

Quality will be measured in accordance with meeting the objectives stated in the PWS.

Therefore, satisfactory work performance shall be based on the objectives described in Table 1 and the acceptance of deliverables listed in Table 2.

Table 1 QASP Performance Matrix

Performance Objective Performance Threshold/AQL Method of Surveillance

Make appointment available for IMEs (15 days) (Section C, paragraph 7.6.1.1) and AMI appointments (30 days) (Section C, paragraph 7.6.1.2)

Timely and error-free service 90% of the time.

Monthly Inspection through Random Sampling

Timely response (24-hour call back at the latest) to applicant scheduling issues, complaints, issues with accessing the applicant portal, issues with authorizations (AMS providers) encountered by the applicants, etc. (Section C, paragraph 7.6.1.3)

Timely 95% of the time Applicant / Provider Complaint

Submit complete and accurate IMEs (Section C, paragraph 7.8.1.1) and AMI (Section C, paragraph 7.8.1.2) within fifteen (15) calendar days of the last

Timely and error-free service 90% of the time.

Monthly Inspection through Random Sampling

Processing Standards Rejections (Section C, paragraph 7.8.1.4)

No more than ten (10) rejections per calendar month for IMEs, and no more than ten (10) rejections per calendar month for AMIs.

COR Monthly Review

“Standards Rejections” (e.g., Incomplete Examination, Rejected Examinations) reprocessed in fifteen (15) calendar days (Section C, paragraph 7.8.1.7)

Timely and error-free service 90% of the time.

Monthly Inspection through Random Sampling

Report “Failure to Appear” appointments minimally monthly through invoicing

Timely and error-free service 95% of the time.

Monthly Inspection through Random Sampling

Report “Partial” Initial Medical Examinations minimally monthly through invoicing

Timely and error-free service 95% of the time.

Monthly Inspection

Safeguard Applicant records and Personal Identifiable Information (Section C, paragraph 7.7.2)

Error-free service 100% of the time.

Applicant complaint

Validate access authorization documents are signed for contractor employees who have access to personal information (e.g., non-disclosure agreement, access authorization documents) (Section C, paragraph 7.7.3)

Timely and error-free service 95% of the time.

Periodic Inspection

Train new contractor management personnel within thirty (30) days of assignment to the DoDMERB Contract (Section C, paragraph 7.1.2.2)

Timely and error-free service 95% of the time.

Periodic Inspection

Consistently submit legible IMEs and AMS

Legible 95% of the time. Monthly Inspection through Random Sampling

Quality Tools

The Client and GSA will use the following management tools to monitor the Contractor’s effort:

● Monthly Status Reports

● In-Process Reviews

● Project specific reports as stated in PWS

● Schedules and/or timetables

● Industry standardized processes and procedures

● Invoices

● Observation by client

● Complaints

● The following deliverables as stated in the PWS:

Table 2 Deliverables Deliverable Delivery

Provide and maintain list of management personnel who are qualified to train contractor management personnel. (Section C, paragraph 7.1.2)

NLT thirty (30) calendar days of accepting a management position. Updates as changes occur (no more than once a month)

Proposed procedural variations (Section C, paragraph 7.3)

As determined by the Contractor

DoDMERB requests for additional IME centers to be established or discontinued. (Section C, paragraph 7.5.3)

Provide evidence thirty (30) calendar days after notification from the CO

Contractor amending of IME or AMI Centers (Section C, paragraph 7.5.4)

NLT ten (10) business days prior to execution

Unsuitable IME/AMI – Information regarding adequate safeguards and/or cause for continued usage (Section C, paragraph 7.5.5.2)

Fifteen (15) calendar days after notification from CO that IME/AMI location is unsuitable

Establish new IME or AMI centers determined unsuitable by DoDMERB (Section C, paragraph 7.5.5.4)

Thirty (30) calendar days after written notification from the CO

Access Authorization Document for each contractor employee (Section C, paragraph 7.7.3)

As requested by DoDMERB or CO

IME quality controlled and submitted to DoDMERB (Section C, paragraph 7.8.1.1)

Submitted within fifteen (15) calendar days of last examination

AMI quality controlled and submitted to DoDMERB (Section C, paragraph 7.8.1.2)

Submitted within fifteen (15) calendar days of last appointment

Brochure for Network Providers detailing examination and administrative procedures (Section C, paragraph 7.8.2.5)

After CO approval and within five (5) calendar days after the contract start date or being assigned as a new Network Provider

Non-Disclosure Agreement (Section C, paragraph 7.9.7)

Within ten (10) business days after contract award

Monthly Status Reports (Section E, paragraph E.4)

NLT 10th day of the following month

QCP (Section F, paragraph 3.2) Initial QCP submitted with proposal; updates submitted as changes occur or, at a minimum, updated annually.

Kickoff Meeting Minutes (Section F, paragraph 4.3)

Within ten (10) days after meeting date

Final Invoice (Section G, paragraph 1.5) Within sixty (60) days after each PoP completion (base and each option year)

Release of Claims (Section G, paragraph 2.1) Within fifteen (15) calendar days after final payment

Transition Plan (Section H.7)

Initial Transition Plan submitted with proposal;

updates submitted as changes occur

1.6 Roles and Responsibilities

The GSA Project Manager (PM), CO, and the COR will perform Quality Assurance Surveillance (QAS) duties such as monitoring funds, status reports, and burn rates, completing contract modifications as needed, working with the Client and Contractor to resolve any outstanding issues, and identifying milestones for option awards.

1.6.1 GSA Contracting Officer (CO)

The CO is the only individual authorized to enter into, administer, and/or terminate the contract and make related determination and findings.

The CO is the only individual that is authorized to delegate (delegation must be in writing) specific contract administration duties to other individuals. The CO will delegate specific responsibilities to the COR prior to the contract award and ensure that a copy of the signed letter of designation is included in the COR’s file.

The CO ensures oversight and control of contract actions. The CO will also be responsible for the day-to-day monitoring of the Contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance and contract administration; reviewing of the QASP’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance; and resolving all differences between the QASP’s version and Contractor’s version. The CO may call upon the expertise of other Government individuals, as required. The CO’s procurement authorities include the following:

● FINAL authority for any decisions which produces an increase or decrease in the scope of the contract,

● FINAL authority for any actions subject to the “Changes” clause,

● FINAL authority for any decision to be rendered under the “Disputes” clause,

● FINAL authority to approve the Contractor’s invoices for payment, subject to the Limitation of Costs clause and the Limitation of Funds clause,

● Signatory authority for the issuance of all modifications to the contract.

1.6.2 GSA Project Manager (PM)

The GSA PM will rely on the COR to perform the on-site monitoring of the Contractor. The GSA PM will stay in close contact with the COR in monitoring the Contractor’s performance.

1.6.3 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

The COR is responsible for reviewing technical documentation, performing surveillance and notifying the CO upon identification of any deficiencies in performance. At regular intervals (quarterly), and at the conclusion of the Task Order, or when requested by the CO, the COR shall provide documentation to the GSA PM and CO for their review and action, as required.

The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. TBD shall refer any changes that it deems may affect Task Order, price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action. 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 that it deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action.

Project Quality Assurance (QA)

1.7 QA Procedures

a. Tasks involved with performing QA will include the following:

● Review and analysis of data.

● Documentation of analysis.

● Corrective action(s).

● Documentation of lessons learned.

● Update of final quality information into official Government Past Performance databases.

b. The COR(s) assigned to perform surveillance of the contract will maintain a Surveillance Folder for their assigned contract requirements. The folder has the following divisions:

● COR appointment letter, CO letter of designation, and Training Record.

● PWS, CDRL, and other pertinent parts of the contract.

● Surveillance Reports.

● Other applicable documentation, such as:

o Customer and applicant comments o Data and technical reports

1.8 Project Monitoring Processes

Continuous evaluation of the Contractor’s performance with respect to the effective and efficient delivery of tasks is necessary to ensure the project is satisfying the requirements of the PWS.

Collection of documentation for evaluation will include those items found in Tables 1 and 2.

The COR will use the quality tools identified above to evaluate interim checkpoints of the task.

These checkpoints will include, but are not limited to, the following:

● Invoices are accurate and submitted within a timely manner.

● Review of monthly status reports.

1.9 Project Quality Control (QC)

The Contractor supporting this task will be responsible for performing QC of the task.

1.9.1 Project Deliverables Acceptance Process

Only the COR, their designated alternate, the GSA PM/CO has the authority to inspect, accept, or reject all deliverables. Final acceptance of all deliverables will be provided in electronic format, to the GSA PM/CO within thirty (30) days from the end of the contract.

Performance by the Contractor to correct defects found by the Government as a result of QA surveillance and by the Contractor as a result of QC, shall be in accordance with FAR 52.212- 4(a).

The COR will monitor compliance and report to the GSA PM.

1.9.2 Project Deliverables Acceptance Criteria

In the absence of other agreements negotiated with respect to time provided for government review, deliverables will be inspected in accordance with all specifications stated in PWS.

1.10 Quarterly Quality Reviews

The COR and GSA PM will perform quarterly quality reviews to ensure the work being performed is meeting the requirements of the PWS. These reviews will cover the areas identified in the Performance Evaluation Worksheet, Attachment A of this document. The evaluation scores will be based on contractors’ ability in satisfying the desired end results listed in Table 1.

These quality reviews will occur every (3) months and will be due no later than thirty (30) days after the end of the previous review period.

In addition to quarterly reviews, the COR and GSA PM will complete annual Contract Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) for submission into the CPAR system.

All ratings will be based on the criteria described in Attachment A.

Attachment A

Quarterly COR Report

Click here for the fillable form:

COR Quarterly Report_v1.pdf

CPARS Evaluation Rating Definitions (see FAR 42.1503(h)(4))

(a) Exceptional (b) Very Good (c) Satisfactory (d) Marginal (e) Unsatisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was

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

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has

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 a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s

Contractor:

Contract Number:

Contract Name:

Contract POP:

Location of Service:

Contracting Officer:

COR:

Month, Year Quality Schedule Cost Control

Business Relations/Manage ment Small Business Regulatory Compliance

Overall Performance

Significant Issues (for CO attention)

(a) Exceptional (b) Very Good (c) Satisfactory (d) Marginal (e) Unsatisfactory CPARS Evaluation Rating Definitions under FAR 42.1503(h)(4)

Quarterly COR Report Template

Monthly Reports accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

appear or were satisfactory.

not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Note: To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Note: To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government.

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/order.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Note: To justify Marginal performance, 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).

Note: To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, 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).