Attachment 2 - QASP - Postdoctoral Research Support.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Postdoctoral Research Support Services

Postdoctoral Services, QASP

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

4.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

7.0. FAILURE TO PERFORM

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT I - REQUIRED PERFORMANCE METRICS (RPM) TABLE………………..7

ATTACHMENT II – QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM (QAMF) ............ Error!

Bookmark not defined.

ATTACHMENT III – QAMF - CUSTOMER COMPLIANT INVESTIGATION

Attachment I contains a table that identifies performance-based measures which will be used to monitor Contractor performance. The Government will periodically evaluate the Contractor’s performance by appointing a representative(s) to monitor performance to ensure services are received. The Government representative will evaluate the Contractor’s daily performance through personal dealings and direct inspections of work products and demonstrated knowledge of applicable regulations. The Government may conduct random inspections and increase the number of quality control inspections if deemed appropriate because of repeated failures discovered during quality control inspections or because of repeated customer complaints.

Likewise, the Government may decrease the number of quality control inspections if performance dictates. The Government representative shall make final determination of the validity of customer complaint(s).

If any of the services do not conform to contract requirements, the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the Government may:

(a) Require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

(b) Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed. Performance scoring will be in accordance with the acceptable quality level identified in the performance measurements table.

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance-based Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Services. This performance-based plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Government will use in evaluating the technical performance of the contractor.

1.1 PURPOSE

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to measure performance and to identify the reports required and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards identified in the PWS.

1.1.2 This QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.2.1 The performance-based PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service is required as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work. This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the Government to monitor, manage, and take appropriate action on the contractor’s performance against expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS. Performance management rests upon developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance metrics. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management. The data generated in a performance management approach provides information that indicates whether or not expected outcomes for required services are being achieved adequately by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management also represents a significant shift from the more traditional Quality Assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether or not outcomes are being achieved and migrates away from scrutiny on compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (Federal, State, and local) and compelling business situations such as safety and health. An outcome 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 at the desired levels of performance.

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

1.3.1 The contractor’s internal quality control system 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 utilize its internal quality control system to assess and report their performance to the designated Government representative.

1.3.2 The Government representative 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 decisions 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 (KO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration and cost control; and resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the contractor’s performance.

2.2 The KO will designate one full-time COR as the Government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as Technical Inspectors depends upon the complexity of the services measured as well as the contractor’s performance.

2.3 The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, and communicating the technical performance of the contractor and assisting the contractor. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms (refer to Attachments II and III) 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 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

The contractor shall provide service support in accordance with the PWS. The performance standards are established in the paragraph of the PWS that covers the specific category of work.

The acceptable level of performance is set in the acceptable quality level related to that paragraph.

4.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 In an effort to minimize the contract administration burden, simplified methods of surveillance techniques shall be used by the Government to evaluate contractor performance. The primary methods of surveillance are reports and customer input/feedback. The Government will use appointed representatives, as well as reports and input from users/customers as sources of comments on the contractor’s performance.

4.2 The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of professional communication between employees and customers 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 addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

NOTE: The customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor. The COR will accept the customer complaints and will investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint Investigation identified in Attachment III.

4.3 The acceptable quality levels (AQL) located in Attachment 1, Required Performance Metrics Table, for contractor performance, are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

5.1 The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and measured by the required performance metrics in Attachment I.

5.2 The Government’s QA monitoring, accomplished by the COR (and others as designated) will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments II and III. The forms, when completed, will document the COR’s understanding of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the PWS requirements are being met.

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

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

6.1 The Government shall use the observation methods cited to determine whether the AQLs have been met. The Government’s evaluation is then translated into the specific negative incentives that cause adjustments to the contractor’s monthly payments.

6.2 The KO may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the KO and other Government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation.

The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, however if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the KO as often as required or per the contractor’s request.

The agenda of the reviews may discuss:

Monthly performance measured by the metrics and trends

Issues and concerns of both parties

Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trend

Recommendations made by the COR based on contractor information

Issues arising from independent reviews and inspections

6.3 In addition to QA monitoring, the COR will use the information contained in the contractor’s monthly report to assess the contractor’s level of performance for each objective measured in this QASP (detailed in Attachment I). The COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance. The contractor will discuss with the KO/COR satisfaction ratings receiving a “less than acceptable” rating. For such cases, the contractor should highlight its perspective on factors driving customer satisfaction and present plans to adjust service levels accordingly to bring the satisfaction rating up to an acceptable level.

6.4 The KO/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 KO.

7.0 FAILURE TO PERFORM

7.1 The contractor may receive deductions or even termination based on failure to perform. The following criteria apply for determining appropriate action:

7.1.1 Notifications. Consistent with FAR Part 49, the KO shall notify the service provider of failure to meet standards through QA monitoring forms, cure notices, or show cause notices and shall inform the service provider project manager or designated alternate of such notices.

7.1.2 Termination. If the KO determines that the contractor has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the KO shall issue a notice of termination, consistent with FAR Part 49.

ATTACHMENT I

REQUIRED PERFORMANCE METRICS (RPM) TABLE

PWS

Ref.

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

Performance Measurement

Incentive

1 6.1.2.

Perform limb transplant surgery on rats

Contract requirement met with few minor and no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 95% contract requirements.

Periodic Inspection

Past Performance

2 6.1.3.

Administer stem cells and growth factors to animals

Contract requirement met with few minor and no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 95% contract requirements

Periodic Inspection

Past Performance

3 6.1.4. Sacrifice animals and harvest tissue for cellular /biological analysis

Contract requirement met with few minor and no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 100% contract requirements

Periodic Inspection

Past Performance

6.1.5. Assist in

laboratory experiments

Contract requirement met with few minor and no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 100% contract requirements

Periodic Inspection

Past Performance

6.1.6. Store and ship

tissue samples to collaborators

Contract requirement met with no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 100% contract requirements

Periodic Inspection

Past Performance

6.1.7. Perform Statistical

analysis

Contract requirement met with no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 100% contract requirements

PWS

Ref.

Performance Objective

Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

Performance Measurement

Incentive

6.1.8. Assist the PI as

needed in lab animal work including literature search, manuscript prep, Contractor requirement met with no significant problems encountered

Contractor’s technical performance meets 95% contract requirements

ATTACHMENT II

QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: ___________________

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check): _____ Reports

_____ 100% Inspection

_____ Periodic Inspection

_____ Customer Input/Feedback

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE SELECTED (Check):

_____ Monthly

_____ Quarterly

_____ As needed

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 III

QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM –

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION

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: _________________