Attachment 0002 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).doc

PAGE

86615621Q00002 Attachment 0002

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statements (PWS) entitled: Task Order Construction Inspection Services Region 1, Task Order Construction Inspection Services Region 2, and Task Order Construction Inspection Services Region 3. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Healthcare Programs (OHP) 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 OHP 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, if 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 if 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 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 Representative (COR) or Subordinate Contracting Officer Representative (SCOR) and the Contractor. The CO will designate one full-time COR/SCOR 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 Subordinate Contracting Officer Representative

The SCOR is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. SCOR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR or SCOR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR or SCOR 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 SCOR 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.

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

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:

· 100% Inspection – Each month, the SCOR shall review all deliverables per the Contract and PWS.

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 CO, COR and/or SCOR, 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 or SCOR.

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. For certain critical activities such as those involved with obtaining construction start letters, site visits coinciding with the Builder’s Draw, and submission of final construction records, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance at OHP.

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 SCOR will be reported using the monitoring form (aka – CDR Cover Letter) in Attachment 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 for monthly site inspections, and related construction monitoring and reporting are being achieved.

5.2.1 The SCOR 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.

6.2 Reporting

6.2.1 On a quarterly basis, the SCOR will prepare a written report 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 COR may require the Contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the SCOR and other government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR or SCOR 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 or SCOR 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

· Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

6.3.2 The CO, COR, or SCOR must coordinate and communicate with the Contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

6.3.3 The COR, SCOR, 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.

6.4 Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (Appendix 1) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the Contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the Contractor's performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The PRS should be used to form the foundation of the COR's inspection checklist.

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Performance

Rating Criteria

APPENDIX 1 - SURVEILLANCE MATRIX

5.2.1.3

Construction Start Letters

CDR 1

a) The Contractor shall obtain the start letter from the Builder and transmit it to the SCOR.

b) The Contractor shall transmit Construction Start Letters to the SCOR electronically via email.

AQL: Within 5 business days of receipt from the Builder.

What: Deliverables

How: COR will inspect for completion and review deliverable

Frequency: Randomly

Who: COR/Subject Matter Expert (SME) Standard(s): Inspection applies to all standards

5.2.1

5.2.2

5.2.3

5.2.4

HUD Representative Trip Report

(HUD-95379-ORCF)

CDR 2

a) The Contractor shall generate the HUD 95379-ORCF after each inspection and transmit it to the SCOR.

b) The Contractor shall transmit HUD Representative Trip Report and related attachments to the SCOR electronically via email.

AQL: Within 5 business days of the inspection.

What: Deliverables

How: COR will inspect for completion and review deliverable

Frequency: Randomly

5.2.1.4

Contractor’s Requisition

(HUD-92448-ORCF)

CDR 3

a) The Contractor shall review and sign the HUD-92448-ORCF.

b) The Contractor shall transmit the Contractor’s Requisition and related attachments to the SCOR electronically via email.

AQL: Within 5 business days of the inspection.

What: Deliverables

How: COR will inspect for completion and review deliverable

Frequency: After completion of task

Who: COR/SME

5.2.3.8

Final Construction Record

CDR 4

a. The Contractor shall assemble all previous deliverables and send them on CD-R to the SCOR.

b. The Contractor shall transmit the Construction Record to the SCOR via US Mail or overnight delivery.

AQL: Within 7 business days after the 12-Month or last warranty inspection.

What: Deliverables

How: Review deliverable

Frequency: After completion of task

Who: COR/SME

APPENDIX 2 – CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MINOR

MAJOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

REJECTED

ACCEPTED

12. CLOSE DATE

APPENDIX 3 – CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

APPENDIX 4 - PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse, and identify by number)

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE NON-CONCUR

CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

CONCUR

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS

APPENDIX – 5 SAMPLE QUALITYASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

(aka – CDR Cover Letter)

Sample Cover Letter

COMPANY LETTERHEAD

TODAY’S DATE: __________ CONTRACT #: __________

TASK ORDER#: _________

TO SCOR/CM: ___________________

PROJECT NAME: _____________________________

CDR#: ___________

DATE OF INSPECTION: _____________ DATE DUE TO HUD: ___________

DESCRIPTION OF SUBMITTAL: _______________________________

For the description indicate type Contract Deliverable Requirement indicated for each CDR #1 through 4 in Technical Exhibit 3. When used for CDR #2, indicate the specific type of trip report: i.e. Draw Inspection, Non-Draw Inspection, Final Inspection, Delayed Items of Completion, 9-Month or 12-Month, Follow-up to 12-Month, and then indicate the applicable attachments below.

ATTACHMENTS:

Photos

Architects Supplemental Instructions

Employee Wage Interviews

Advance of Escrow Funds, Approval

Supv. Architect Field Reports

Occupancy Approval Forms

Construction Change Documents

Other: _____________________________

SUBMITTED BY: _____________________________________

TITLE: _________________________________________

Type or Print Name of Person Signing Above

DATE RECEIVED BY HUD: __________________

ACCEPTABLE / UNACCEPTABLE (circle one)

HUD COMMENTS: ___________________________________________________________________________________

CONTRACT INSPECTOR ACTION REQUIRED:__________________________________________________________________________

SIGNATURE OF SCOR/CM: _________________________________Date: ____________

PAGE

i