D.2 ATTACHMENT 2 - QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP).docx

DOCX document 59 KB Posted

Attached to
Q527--LOCUM-Chief Therapeutic Medical Physicist Rad-Onc-614 Onsite Services
Solicitation number
36C24923R0036
Issued by

About this file

This document is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for onsite board certified Chief Therapeutic Medical Physicist services in Radiation Oncology at the Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center. The QASP outlines performance standards and acceptable quality levels for key personnel qualifications and availability, standard operating procedures, quality assurance and improvement documentation, radiation safety policies, and medical physicist reports. It details monitoring methods including direct observation, periodic inspection of patient files, validated user complaints, and random sampling. Performance will be evaluated quarterly on metrics such as peer review conference attendance, equipment performance documentation, and training completion. Contract performance ratings will be assigned based on whether standards are met or acceptable quality levels are achieved. The QASP is acknowledged by both the contracting officer's representative and the contractor.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
36C24923R0036 0002.docx DOCX document
36C24923R0036 0001.docx DOCX document
D.6 ATTACHMENT 6 - CANDIDATE PACKET COVER SHEET.docx DOCX document
D.5 ATTACHMENT 5 - ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.docx DOCX document
D.1 ATTACHMENT 1 - ADDENDUM TO PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT.docx DOCX document
D.4 ATTACHMENT 4 - CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION OF IMMIGRATION.docx DOCX document
D.7 ATTACHMENT 7 - PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY.docx DOCX document
36C24923R0036_1.docx DOCX document
D.3 ATTACHMENT 3 - CONTRACTOR RULES OF BEHAVIOR.docx DOCX document

On GovTribe

Work with this file

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

Text version

D.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

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.

1.1. Assigned CO:Olonzo Haynes
Organization or Agency:Network Contracting Office (NCO) - 9

1639 Medical Center Parkway Murfreesboro, TN 37129 Olonzo.Haynes@va.gov (615)-225-6959

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.

1.2. Assigned COR:Reginald Penny
Organization or Agency:Memphis Veterans Affair Medical Center
Radiology Service

1030 Jefferson Ave Memphis, TN 38104 Reginald.Penny@va.gov (901)-523-8990 ext.: 5382

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

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

Primary Program Manager: Reginald Penny/Administrative Officer/COR Alternate Program Manager: None Assigned

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: Observation and random inspection (auditing) surveys.

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. Ten (10) randomly selected patient files will be reviewed per inspection period. All inspections and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA Privacy and Information security standards.)

c. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling. Random survey is conducted to solicit user satisfaction. Inspection and sampling may also be generated.

d. RANDOM SAMPLING. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. Ten (10) randomly selected patient files will be reviewed per quarter. All reviews and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA Privacy and Information security standards.

36C24923R0036-Onsite Board Certified Chief Therapeutic Medical Physicist Radiation Oncology – Memphis VA Medical Center

36C24923R0036-Onsite Board Certified Chief Therapeutic Medical Physicist Radiation Oncology – Memphis VA Medical Center

e. Verification and/or documentation provided by Contractor. Reviewable documentation will be maintained and accessible for periodic inspection to ensure it is in accordance with ACR standards.

6. QASP PERFORMANCE Report DATE: ______________

Measure
PWS

Para.

Performance Requirement

Standard
Acceptable Quality Level
Surveillance

Method Met AQL/DID NOT MEET AQL-

CPAR RATING/ADD COMMENTS

Qualifications and Availability of Key Personnel

Section 2 4.6.4.1

Chief Therapeutic Medical Physicist Radiation Oncology shall be board certified in accordance with national recognized accrediting body standards. The Contractor shall provide evidence of two (2) key personnel for proper coverage due to absence in order to be in compliance with the standard of care outlined in this PWS.
CTMP shall comply by maintaining their board certified in accordance with the national recognized accrediting body. One (1) CTMP shall be available to provide services to veterans 100% of the time.
99%
Quarterly Radom Sampling
Peer Review Conferences/ Chart Rounds
4.4.1.3

4.6.4.2

CTMP is attending all Peer Review Conferences as outlined in the PWS. During these conferences they will discuss the appropriateness of treatment decisions, goals, and results related to patients.
Attendance to Peer Review Conference and providing valid input to the treatment discussion, document and report as required.
95%
Weekly Direct Observation
Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for all radiotherapy techniques
4.6.4.3
Review and update all Policy’s, Procedure, and SOPs for every treatment methodology documented per applicable guidelines.
All of radiotherapy techniques employed by the Contractor, such as 2D/3D, Conformal, Conventional External Beam, IMRT/VMAT, IGRT, SRT, SBRT, and SRS, etc., have written procedures in accordance with ACR guidelines. All procedures are reviewed and updated annually.
95%
Verification and/or document provided by Contractor submitted in accordance with facility reporting requirements. Prior to initiation of new technique and annually.
Quality Assurance/Quality Improvement (QA/QI) Documentation
4.6.4.3
Contractor shall have an operational performance improvement process in accordance with ACR Standards; including data collection, measurement, assessment and improvement. Data shall be required on processes, outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality control. Appropriate statistical quality control techniques in compliance with ACR standards must be utilized. Results of performance improvement activities must be reported quarterly to the VA Radiation Oncology Service Quality Assurance Committee.
All QA/QI documents complete in accordance with ACR standards and reported as required to VA Radiation Oncology Service QA Committee.
98%
Quarterly Periodic Inspection.
Radiation Safety Policy and Standards for ACR Accreditation
4.6.4.5
CTMP is responsible for the Radiation Safety Program (RSP) of the Radiation Oncology Service/Section. The RSP shall meet the accreditation standards of the ACR Radiation Oncology Program for Accreditation (ROPA). RSP shall meet the radiation safety standards, policies and procedures set by NRC, NHPP and the ACR. The RSP status, to include the correction plan for all radiation safety related deficiencies noted by site surveys from ACR, NHPP or Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) shall be reported quarterly as a part of the quarterly medical physicist report to the Memphis VAMC Radiation Safety Committee.
All Radiation safety standards and external review requirements shall be met. Quality Management reports shall be submitted quarterly to the Memphis VAMC Radiation Safety Committee.
98%
Annual Periodic Inspection.
Medical Physicist Reports demonstrate ACR Standards
4.6.4.6
Contractor’s Medical Physicists shall develop and maintain a quality management program (QMP) for the dosimetry system(s) and all applications pertinent thereto. Said QMP shall define explicit evaluation criteria intended to ensure that the prescribed dose is delivered in a safe, consistent and accurate manner. Contractor shall provide the VA Radiation Oncology Service, with written reports of these activities. Quality management of radiation therapy equipment is primarily an ongoing evaluation of functional performance characteristics.
All required medical physicist reports documenting the successful evaluation of equipment performance (meeting or exceeding ACR Standards) to include therapy machines, radiation sources, and simulators for proper working order is required. All external review requirements per ACR Standards are met, including those of TJC..
98%
Quarterly Periodic Inspection
Mandatory Training
2.5

2.6 4.6.4.7

Contractor shall complete all required training per VAMC policy.
All of required training completed on time by Contractor
99%
Monthly Periodic Inspection TMS Driven.

Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA

2.6 2.10 4.3 4.6.4.8

The Contractor is aware and understands all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA.
Complies with all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA resulting in no violations during contract term.
100%

Quarterly Periodic Inspection

Professionalism/ Conduct 2.6 4.6.4.9

Contractor employees maintain excellent relationships with patients, Radiation Oncology staff members, VA Medical Center staff members, and vendors.
Zero complaints from VA Medical Center staff members related to the contractor’s employee interfering with patient care or the ordinary operation of the facility.
98%
Monthly Periodic Inspection/COR notification of complaints

7.

8. CPAR 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)

EXCEPTIONAL:
Contractor always meets the standard. 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:
Contractor almost always meets the standard, always performs over the Acceptable Quality Level. 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:
Contractor occasionally meets the standard, but more often meets the Acceptable Quality Level. 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:
Contractor most often meets the Acceptable Quality Level, occasionally does not meet the Acceptable Quality Level and CDRs have been reported. 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 thecontractual deficiency (e.g. Management, Quality, Safety or Environmental Deficiency Report or letter).
UNSATISFACTORY:
Contractor has history of not meeting Acceptable Quality Level. Significant efforts have been made to bring Contractor into performance. 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 deficiencies (e.g. Management, Quality, Safety or Environmental Deficiency Reports, or letters).

9. 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 REPORT (CPAR).

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 below.

10. COR AND CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QASP

SIGNED:

COR: Reginald L. Penny DATE Administrative Officer - Radiology

SIGNED:

CONTRACTOR NAME/TITLE DATE

CONTRACT REPORT

1. CONTRACT NUMBER
2. REPORT NUMBER FOR THIS ISSUE
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

END OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

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