Attachment 2 QASP.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

SEELEY LAKE RANGER DISTRICT JANITORIAL SERVICES

Seeley Lake Ranger District Lolo National Forest Missoula County, Montana

QASP

Seeley Lake Ranger District, Lolo National Forest Janitorial Services

Contents

1.0 Introduction

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Seeley Lake Ranger District Janitorial Services, (Base Year & Four Option Years). This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Seeley Lake Ranger District 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 the Seeley Lake Ranger District 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.

2.0 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 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 Representative

The contracting officer’s representative (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.

3.0 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. Failure to meet the required service or performance level will result in a deduction from the monthly amount.

4.0 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 -

· Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR or designated inspector.

· Periodic Inspection – COR typically performs the periodic inspection monthly.

· Customer Feedback

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, 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 delivered to the COR. (Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.) The COR will accept the customer complaints, investigate and validate the complaints, and notify the Contractor of all complaints. The following forms are available and will be used to at the COR’s discretion, to record, investigate, and communicate customer complaints.

· Attachment 2: Quality Assurance Monitoring/Customer Complaint

· Attachment 3: Customer Feedback Record

· Attachment 4: Customer Complaint Investigation

· Attachment 5: Discrepancy Report

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in Attachment 1, Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) 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 Building Security, 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 the Seeley Lake Ranger District.

5.0 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 COR, will be reported using any of the monitoring forms in Attachments 2 - 7.

· ATTACHMENT 2: Quality Assurance Monitoring/Customer Complaint

· ATTACHMENT 3: Customer Feedback Record

· ATTACHMENT 4: Customer Complaint Investigation

· ATTACHMENT 5: Discrepancy Report

· ATTACHMENT 6: Corrective Action Report

· ATTACHMENT 7: Surveillance Activity Checklist

The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results (reference Table below) are being achieved.

Perform Services within Schedule Requirements (reference the Service Delivery Summary)

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

6.0 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. Note: The COR will utilize the Corrective Action Report form (Attachment 6) to notify the Contractor when a Corrective Action Plan is needed. 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 COR 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 (Attachments 2 - 7), 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 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 COR 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

· Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

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

6.3.3 The COR 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 (PRS)

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

(Services may be performed in accordance with customary, commercial practices)

Performance Objective (Service Task)

Location

(Payment Incentives, Disincentives)*

· 3.1.2 - Trash receptacles shall be clean, free of food, liquids, and grime, and be free from odors. Trash is properly disposed of in outside dumpsters.

· 3.1.3 - Drinking fountains are free of streaks, stains, spots, smudges, scale, and other deposits.

· 3.1.4 - Carpets/throw rugs are visually free of dirt, debris, litter, and other foreign matter. No spots or spills are detected.

· 3.1.5 - Floor mats are free of visible lint, litter, soil, and foreign matter. No soil or moisture is detected underneath mats.

· 3.1.6 - Washable, high-touch surfaces of walls, partitions, vents, grillwork, doors, kickplates, light and control switch plates, and fixtures have a clean, uniform appearance, and are free of fingerprints, smudges, streaks, spots, and soil. No cobwebs are visible.

· 3.1.7 - Surfaces including windowsills, chair legs, tops of file cabinets, front desk areas, bookshelves, pictures, and glassy display cases are free of dust.

· 3.1.8 - Restrooms, break rooms, and utility rooms shall have a sanitary, clean, shiny appearance with no visible or tactile residue, dirt, or mineral build-up and be well stocked.

· 3.1.9 - Showers are free of soap films, scum, and other deposits. Toilets and urinals are free of scale, stains, scum, and other deposits.

· 3.1.10 - Restrooms are stocked sufficiently, and supplies are available with no out of stock reports.

· Periodic Inspection – COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

· Customer Feedback

5% deduction from established monthly rate for the Main Office or Warehouse Building when defects exceed AQL.

· 3.2.2 - After interior glass cleaning, there is no film, dirt, smudges, water, or other foreign matter. Interior window frames, casings, and sills are free from film, dirt, smudges, water and foreign matter.

· 3.2.3 - After exterior glass cleaning, there is no film, dirt, smudges, water, or other foreign matter. Exterior window frames, casings, and sills are free from film, dirt, smudges, water and foreign matter.

· 3.2.4 - Light fixtures are free of dirt, dust, debris, and insects (except for fluorescent fixtures that are not removed from the ceiling).

· 3.2.5 - After shampooing, carpeted areas are uniform in appearance and free of stains and discoloration.

· 3.2.6 - Floors have a glossy uniform appearance, free from scuff marks, heel marks, wax buildup, and other stains and discoloration.

· 3.2.7 - Windows are free of film, dirt, smudges, water, and other foreign matter.

· 3.2.8 - Walls, ceilings, woodwork, and exposed plumbing are free from stains, dust, debris, and detergent residue.

· 3.2.9 - Shop floor surfaces are free from litter, dirt, dust, debris, detergent residue, and evidence of standing water.

· Periodic Inspection – COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

· Customer Feedback

5% deduction from established monthly rate for the Main Office or Warehouse Building when defects exceed AQL.

· Periodic Inspection – COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

· Customer Feedback 5% deduction from established monthly rate for the Main Office or Warehouse Building when defects exceed AQL.

Building Security

All Government facilities, equipment, and property are secured. Doors are locked and windows are closed at the end of each service visit.

Building access codes/combinations and keys are secured/not shared. No unauthorized personnel are granted building access.

· Periodic Inspection – COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

· Customer Feedback 10% deduction from established monthly rate for the Main Office or Warehouse Building when defects exceed AQL.

*Payment Deduction Threshold: If the number of defects (e.g., instances of unacceptable performance) observed during a month-long period, or for the month periodic services are performed, is equal to or less than the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL), then there will be no deduction in payments to the Contractor for the task. However, if the number of defects observed during a month-long period, or for the month periodic services are performed, the number of defects is greater than the AQL, then a deduction in payment to the Contractor will result.

ATTACHMENT 2 Quality Assurance Monitoring/Customer Complaint

CONTRACT NUMBER: ______________________________________

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check the applicable item):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check the applicable item):

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______(applicable number of defects, if any) Service Provider’s Performance (Check the applicable item):

Meets Standards Does Not Meet Standards Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

Prepared By: _______________________________ Date: ______________

ATTACHMENT 3: Customer Feedback Record

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK RECORD

DATE AND TIME OF COMPLAINT CONTRACT NUMBER/ OR PROJECT:

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

INDIVIDUAL

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

PWS REFERENCE

VALIDATION

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR (Responsible officer):

RECEIVED AND VALIDATED BY

Determination: Complaint Valid |_| Complaint Invalid |_|

ATTACHMENT 4: Customer Complaint Investigation

CONTRACT NUMBER: _________________________

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: ___________________

DATE COMPLAINT RECEIVED: ____________

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT: _________________________________________ (Name) _______________________________________________________________ (Organization) ___________________ (Phone No.) _________________________________ (Email Address)

NATURE OF COMPLAINT: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

RESULTS OF COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DATE SERVICE PROVIDER INFORMED OF COMPLAINT: _____________

CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN BY SERVICE PROVIDER: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Received and Validated By: __________________________________________ Prepared By: _____________________________ Date: _________________

ATTACHMENT 5: Discrepancy Report

CONTRACT NUMBER: DATE:

4. DISCREPENCY OR PROBLEM (Describe in Detail. Include PWS references. Attach Continuation Sheet if Necessary)

5. SIGNATURE OF COR

8. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE AS TO CAUSE, EFFECT, CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTIONS TO PREVENT RECURRENCE (Attach Continuation Sheet if necessary. Cite applicable Contractor QC program procedures or new QC procedures)

11. GOVERNMENT EVALUATION (Acceptance, partial acceptance, or rejection. Attach Coordination Sheet if necessary)

12. GOVERNMENT ACTIONS (Cure notice, show cause, other)

CLOSE OUT

KTR NOTIFIED

COR

ATTACHMENT 6: Corrective Action Report

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 |_| MAJOR |_| MINOR

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)

9. TYPED NAME AND GRADE

10. SIGNATURE AND DATE

11. ISSUING AUTHORITY

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

15. COR DETERMINATION

|_| ACCEPTED |_| REJECTED

16. CLOSE DATE

ATTACHMENT 7: Surveillance Activity Checklist

Performance Requirement Performance Standard Method of Measurement Performance Metrics Method of Surveillance Date Accomplished Compliance (Exceed, Met, Partial Met) image1.png image2.png