D 4 - QASP.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

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 will monitoring will take place?

• Who will conduct the monitoring?

• How will monitoring efforts and results 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: Fernando Gabriel Defillo

Organization or Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs, NCO-8

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: Josue Rosario Reyes

Organization or Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

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

Primary Program Manager:

Alternate Program Manager:

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: Any Instances reported to the COR by VA employees or customers/patients.

b. PERIODIC/RANDOM INSPECTION: Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. All inspections and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA Privacy and Information security standards.

c. CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. Joint Patient Safety Report (JPSR), Patient Advocate Tracking System (PATS-R).

d. PERIODIC/RANDOM SAMPLING. Evaluates problem/deficiency when suspected. Sample results are applicable only for the specific work inspected. For example, phlebotomy procedures and customer service issues. All reviews and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA Privacy and Information security standards.

6. SAMPLE QASP PERFORMANCE REPORT DATE: __________________

Measures PWS Reference

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Surveillance Method

Accuracy (Technical Competence)

13.1, 15.5.1,15.5.2

Verify two patient identifiers using active identification methods before venipuncture Follow laboratory procedures and ensure accurate test performance Proper specimen labeling and tube selection Perform venipuncture with minimal discomfort Provide clear instructions for patient self-collection procedures

≤ 3 deviations per rating period

Review of Problem Occurrence report for mislabeled samples.

Review of Patient Call back Forms for Specimen Quality Issues.

Productivity 13.2, 15.55.3 Perform duties with accountability and minimal supervision Maintain STAT turnaround time (<1 hour) Complete high workload volumes efficiently and accurately Maintain phlebotomy station readiness and supplies Assist in training and mentoring Each Phlebotomist shall draw a minimum of 48-56 patients per 8-hour shift.

48–56 patients per 8-hour shift

Review of Q-matic (Staff performance report).

Safety 13.4, 14.4,15.5.6

Follow all laboratory safety procedures and universal precautions Use PPE appropriately Maintain clean and safe work environment Properly dispose of biohazard materials Follow hand hygiene and safety protocols (RACE, PASS)

≤ 3 safety-related complaints

Periodic visual inspection

Education and Training 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 14.2, 15.5.4

Complete all mandatory TMS and MTS training before the due dates determined by the laboratory.

Maintain annual competencies and certifications Complete Privacy and HIPAA training requirements

≤ 3 compliance issues per year.

Review of TMS and MTS.

Customer Service 13.3, 15.5.5 Treat all patients and staff with courtesy and respect Maintain professional relationships Adapt communication to patient needs Promote teamwork and cooperation

≤ 3 complaints.

Review of Patient Survey, Patient Advocate Tracking System (PATS-R) and Employee Feedback.

Review of JPSR and Reports of Contact

Validation of Hours Worked

18.3 Attendance will be verified through the QMATIC system, which records the log-in and log-out times. Furthermore, this QMATIC system documents the patients attended by the provider.

100% compliance Review of Qmatic system record of hours worked:

(time in and out)

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/cparsweb/assets/documents/CPARS_User_Manual.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).

UNSATISFACTOR

Y: 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.

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 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpars.gov%2Fcparsweb%2Fassets%2Fdocuments%2FCPARS_User_Manual.pdf&data=05%7C02%7C%7C1299a8a1556647c9c9b208dd897915ec%7Ce95f1b23abaf45ee821db7ab251ab3bf%7C0%7C0%7C638817875334440754%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=6A9MQEEm9YUvO1cWqDUn1sC8wYUJvuCVqG%2F2AhW8s1E%3D&reserved=0 deficiencies (e.g. Management, Quality, Safety or Environmental Deficiency Reports, or letters).

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. The VA 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 shall 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 Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to CO. The CO shall in turn review and shall present to the contractor's program manager for corrective action.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR shall 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 CDR shall also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the CO. The VA 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 CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CO. See Sample on following page.

9. COR AND CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QASP

SIGNED:

COR NAME/TITLE DATE

SIGNED:

CONTRACTOR NAME/TITLE DATE

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT

1. CONTRACT NUMBER 2. REPORT NUMBER FOR THIS

DISCREPANCY

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

5. DATES

a. CDR PREPARED

b. RETURNED BY

CONTRACTOR:

c. ACTION COMPLETE

6. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM (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, CORRECTIVE ACTION 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. (Acceptance, partial acceptance, reflection. Attach continuation sheet(s) if necessary.)

13. GOVERNMENT ACTIONS (Acceptance, partial acceptance, reflection. Attach continuation sheet(s) if necessary.)

14. CLOSE OUT

NAME TITLE SIGNATURE DATE

a. CONTRACTOR

NOTIFIED

b. COR c.

CONTRACTING

OFFICER