Att 1 QASP.docx

ATTACHMENT 1

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

VHA Office of Patient Advocacy Program and Project Management Services i

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Office of Patient Advocacy

Date: 8/9/22

QASP Version Number: 1.0

INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) to provide project and program management support services and related technical services to the VHA Office of Patient Advocacy (OPA) to support the modernization of patient advocacy and complaint resolution operations in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

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 To minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. 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 (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.

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.

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 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.

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

QASP

Project & Program Management Services

and /or Negative)

Task One:

Program & Project Management 1.c.a – Project Management Plan 1.d.a – Weekly Progress Update PPT 1.e.a – Monthly Status Reports

Task Two:

Change Management Support 2.e.a. – Organizational Change Management Plan & Tools

Task Three:

Workforce Capability Development & Management

Task Four:

Data Science & Analytics Support

Task Five:

Management Consulting Services

Note 1: Errors or omissions are defined as deliverables not meeting the intent of the task and the work considered to be within scope of the PWS.

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 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 3: 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.

PERFORMANCE BASED SERVICE ASSESSMENT

CONTRACTOR:

CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER/ TITLE:

GOVERNMENT REQUIRING ACTIVITY:

VHA Office of Patient Advocacy

Place an X in the appropriate response

Performance Standards for Assessment

VERY

A. MEETING TECHNICAL NEEDS: (4.00)

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 accurate, timely & comprehensive?

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

Typed Name And Title of Government Project Lead/ Date:

image1.jpeg