Attachment 1-Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan QASP.pdf

PDF 226 KB Posted

Attached to
UPDATED Neuromonitoring Services - SLC VAMC Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
36C25926Q0822
Issued by
Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration Veterans Integrated Service Network 19

About this file

This is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for neurophysiologic monitoring services provided to Salt Lake City Veterans Affairs Medical Center (SLCVAMC) Surgery Service. The document establishes a systematic framework for evaluating contractor performance against defined standards and acceptable quality levels throughout the contract period.

The QASP identifies seven primary performance measures: Provider Quality Performance (90% requirement for meeting scheduled and on-call obligations), Qualifications of Key Personnel (100% certification requirement for neurophysiologic monitoring technicians), Maintains Licensing, Registration, and Certification (100% current certification requirement), Patient Access (100% on-time availability per operating hours), Patient Safety (100% reporting of incidents via VA Patient Safety Reporting System within 24 hours), Mandatory Training (90% completion requirement), and Privacy, Confidentiality, and HIPAA compliance (90% completion requirement). Surveillance methods include direct observation with 100% coverage, periodic inspections reported quarterly, validated user/customer complaints, random sampling, and contractor-provided documentation verification. Government roles include the Contracting Officer (NCO 19 Healthcare Resource Branch, OALC) and the Contracting Officer's Representative (Salt Lake City VAMC Surgery Service), who jointly evaluate performance and document findings. Performance ratings follow CPARS standards (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory), with formal Contract Reports issued when performance falls below acceptable quality levels. The contractor must submit corrective action plans addressing identified deficiencies, which the Contracting Officer evaluates for acceptability.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to UPDATED Neuromonitoring Services - SLC VAMC, newest first.
File Type Posted
Attachment 5-Wage Determination No 15-5489.pdf PDF
36C25926Q0822 0001.pdf PDF
Attachment 3-Contractor immigration certification.pdf PDF
Attachment 4-Organizational Conflict of Interest.pdf PDF
Attachment 2-Contractors Rules of Behavior.pdf PDF
S02 36C25926Q0822.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

The contractor will be evaluated in accordance with the following:

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated 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.

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

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 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. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: NCO 19 Healthcare Resource Branch Organization or Agency: OALC

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: Salt Lake City VAMC – Surgery Service Organization or Agency: Surgery Service, Salt Lake City Veterans Affairs Medical Center (SLCVAMC)

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

The following employee(s) of the contractor serve as the contractor’s program manager(s) for this contract.

Primary: Salt Lake City VAMC – Surgery Service Alternate: TBD

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The contractor is responsible for performance of ALL terms and conditions of the contract. CORs will provide contract progress reports quarterly to the CO reflecting performance on this plan and all other aspects of the resultant contract. The performance standards outlined in this QASP shall be used to determine the level of contractor performance in the elements defined. Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine the level of Contractor performance to these standards.

The Performance Requirements are listed below in Section 6. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the standard and assign a rating. At the end of the performance period, these ratings will be used, in part, to establish the past performance of the contractor on the contract.

5. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. 100% surveillance.

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed.

c. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS.

d. RANDOM SAMPLING.

e. VERIFICATION AND/OR DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR.

6. QASP PERFORMANCE REPORT

Measures PWS Reference

Performance Requirement

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Surveillance Method

Met AQL/DID NOT

MEET AQL-

CPARS

RATING/ADD

COMMENTS

1-Provider Quality Performance

4.5.4.1. Contractor shall

meet all scheduled obligations, and or on-call requirements.

90% Scheduled and on call requirement are met

90% Logbook entries of technicians on-site.

Surgery Department oversight

2 - Qualifications of Key Personnel

4.5.4.2. Contractor’s

technician(s) Certified. In accordance with

PWS

requirements.

100% Contractor’s technicians (s) are Certified to conduct neurophysiologic monitoring services.

100% Random Inspection of qualification documents

3 - Maintains licensing, registration, and certification

4.5.4.3. Updated

certification shall be provided as they are renewed.

Certification information kept current.

100 % certification(s) for Contractor’s technician(s) shall be provided as they are renewed.

Certification information kept current

100% Periodic Sampling and Random Sampling of documents

4 - Patient Access 4.5.4.4. The Contractor shall provide Contractor’s technician(s) in accordance with the operating hours outlined in this PWS.

100% Contractor’s Technician(s) are on time and available to perform services.

100% Periodic Inspection of Time and Attendance Sheets

5 - Patient Safety 4.5.4.5. Patient safety incidents shall be reported using VA Patient Safety Reporting System. All incidents reported immediately (within 24 hours.)

100% of patient safety incidents are reported using VA Patient Safety Reporting System within 24 hours of incident.

100% Periodic

Inspection or Random Sampling

6 - Mandatory Training 4.5.4.6. Contractor shall complete all required training on time per facility policy

100% of required training is complete on time by Contractor’s Technician(s).

90% completions Periodic Inspection or Random Sampling

7 - Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA

4.5.4.7. Contractor is

aware of all laws, 100% of Contractor’s technician(s)

90% completions Periodic Inspection or Random Sampling;

Contractor shall provide evidence of annual training required by VAMC, reports violations per VA Handbook 6500.6.

7. CPARS RATINGS ASSIGNED TO QASP ITEMS:

Metrics and methods are designed to determine rating for a given standard and acceptable quality level. The following ratings shall be used (Reference: CPARS User Manual https://www.cpars.gov/documents/CPARS- Guidance.pdf):

EXCEPTIONAL: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Note: To justify an Exceptional rating, you should identify multiple significant events in each category and state how it was a benefit to the GOVERNMENT.

However, a singular event could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

VERY GOOD:

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Note: To justify a Very Good rating, you should identify a significant event in each category and state how it was a benefit to the GOVERNMENT. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

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.

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.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

MARGINAL:

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.

Note: To justify Marginal performance, you should 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).

UNSATISFACTO

RY:

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 being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

https://www.cpars.gov/documents/CPARS-Guidance.pdf https://www.cpars.gov/documents/CPARS-Guidance.pdf https://www.cpars.gov/documents/CPARS-Guidance.pdf

JACQUELINE

SIGNED:

WILLIAMS

Digitally signed by

JACQUELINE WILLIAMS

-06'00'

Note: To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, you should identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the GOVERNMENT. However, a singular problem 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).

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. The Government shall document positive and/or negative performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action and preparing annual past performance using CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORTING SYSTEM (CPARS).

b. If contractor performance does not meet the Acceptable Quality level, the CO shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the CO shall document the discussion and place it in the contract file. When the COR and the CO determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Report (CR), and present it to CO. The CO will in turn review and will present to the contractor's program manager for corrective action.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CR in writing. The CR will 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 CR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the CO. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. The CO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance and the acceptability of the Contractor’s corrective action plan.

Any CRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CO. See Sample CR on the following page.

9. COR AND CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QASP

COR NAME/TITLE DATE

SIGNED:

CONTRACTOR NAME/TITLE DATE

CONTRACT REPORT

1. CONTRACT NUMBER 2. REPORT NUMBER

3. TO: (Contracting Officer) 4. FROM: (Name of COR)

5. DATES

a. CR PREPARED b. RETURNED BY

CONTRACTOR:

c. ACTION COMPLETE

6. Issue Identified (Describe in detail. Include reference to PWS Directive; attach continuation sheet if necessary.)

7. SIGNATURE OF COR Date:

8. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER Date:

9a. TO (Contracting Officer) 9a. FROM (Contractor)

10. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE AS TO CAUSE AND ACTIONS TO PREVENT RECURRENCE. (Cite applicable quality control program procedures or new procedures. Attach continuation sheet(s) if necessary.)

11. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE Date:

12. GOVERNMENT EVALUATION.

13. GOVERNMENT ACTIONS

14. CLOSE OUT

NAME TITLE SIGNATURE DATE

CONTRACTOR

NOTIFIED

COR

CONTRACTING

OFFICER

The contractor will be evaluated in accordance with the following:
2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES
4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
5. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE
6. QASP PERFORMANCE REPORT
8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE
9. COR AND CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QASP

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .