Attachment 0002-QASP.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Learning Management Systems Support

U.S. Department of Commerce

International Trade Administration

Global Markets and the U.S. Foreign Commercial Service

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Global Operations

Office of Global Talent Management

Training and Development

Revised: September 1, 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

4.2 Customer Feedback

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

5.2 Monitoring Forms

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.2 Reporting

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

ATTACHMENT 3: CUSTOMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION FORM…………………………….8

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Learning Management Systems Support. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Global

Markets and the U.S. Foreign Commercial Service, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Global

Operations, Office of Global Talent Management, Training and Development Branch, hereafter referred as OGTM/T&D will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 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.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team

(IPT), 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.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 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 by OGTM/T&D 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.

1.2.2 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.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 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 regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 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 contracting officer’s representative (COR) and/or the technical point of contact (TPOC) and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time 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.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative

The contracting officer’s representative (COR) is designated in writing by the CO to act as their 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.

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the PWS and in Attachment 1, “Performance Requirements Summary.” If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract. If the contractor exceeds the service or performance level, Failure to meet the required service or performance level will result in a deduction from the monthly amount.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 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 the following: Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the TPOC designated inspector.

Commented [BK(1]: There are no incentives right?

➢ 100% Inspection – Each month, the TPOC, shall review the generated documentation and enter summary results into the Surveillance Activity Checklist.

➢ Periodic Inspection – TPOC typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

4.2 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 COR and/or TPOC, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint

Investigation, identified in Attachment 3.

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

4.3 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 certain critical activities such as those involving customer support services from the Live Support Services technicians, the desired performance level is established at 95 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance at OGTM/T&D.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 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.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the TPOC, will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments 2. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results PWS activities are being achieved.

5.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.1.1 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. Failure to meet the AQL may result in a deduction from the monthly payment, using the deduction percentages shown in Attachment 1.

6.2 Reporting

6.2.1 At the end of each month, the TPOC will prepare a written report for the COR summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the contractor’s submitted monthly report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2), will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

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

TPOC 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 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

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

6.3.3 The TPOC 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 PCO/ACO.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Desired

Outcome

Required

Service

Performance

Standards /

Acceptable Quality

Levels (AQL)

Monitoring

Method

Simple Help Desk tickets resolved within 1 business day

Simple Help Desk tickets resolved within 1 business day

95% Spot checks to ensure compliance

Complex Help Desk tickets resolved within time committed to by technician

Complex Help Desk tickets resolved within time committed to by technician

95% Spot checks to ensure compliance

Help Desk Tickets resolved without escalation

Help Desk Tickets resolved without escalation

95% Spot checks to ensure compliance

Resolve integration issues between HR software applications

Resolve simple integration issues between HR software applications in less than

1 business day

95% Spot checks to ensure compliance

Chat Rooms available for

GM staff 24/7

Chat Rooms available for GM staff 19/7

99% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

No negative survey results re: Help Desk from GM users

Less than 10% negative survey results re: Help

Desk from GM users

99% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

Analysis of proposed course completed on schedule

Analysis of proposed course completed less than 1 business day behind schedule

95% Spot checks to ensure compliance

Design of proposed course completed on schedule

Design of proposed course completed less than 1 business day behind schedule

95% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

Design of proposed virtual course or webinar completed on schedule

Design of proposed course completed less than 1 business day behind schedule

95% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

Modified web and internal

SharePoint sites

Modified web and internal SharePoint sites within 2 business days behind schedule

95% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

Development of proposed course completed on schedule

Development of proposed course completed less than 1 business day behind schedule

95% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

Test Phase of developed course completed revealing no weaknesses or impediments to release

Test Phase of developed course completed revealing no more than two impediments to release

90% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

100% Section 508

Compliance in all products

100% Section 508

Compliance in all products

99% Review by CLO with contractor’s project manager

100% CLC participant satisfaction

90% CLC participant satisfaction

90% Review participant user survey results

100% CLC course effectiveness

90% CLC course effectiveness

90% Review participant user survey results

ATTACHMENT 2: QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________

ATTACHMENT 3 – CUSTOMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION FORM

To be used by QA Coordinator to document investigation and corrective actions to reported complaints

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: _________________________________________

DATE/TIME COMPLAINT RECEIVED: ______________________ AM / PM

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT:

_________________________________ (NAME)

_________________________________ (ORGANIZATION)

_________________________________ (PHONE NUMBER)

_________________________________ (EMAIL ADDRESS)

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

RESULTS OF COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION:

DATE/TIME SERVICE PROVIDER INFORMED OF COMPLAINT: _______________ AM / PM

CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN BY SERVICE PROVIDER:

RECEIVED AND VALIDATED BY: ____________________________________________________

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: ___________________________