D.4 Attachment 4 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf
PDF 314 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 36C26326R0045
About this file
This document is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for a clinical perfusion services contract with the Department of Veterans Affairs. The QASP establishes the framework for monitoring and evaluating contractor performance against specified standards, with the Contracting Officer (Daniel Vagts) and Contracting Officer's Representative (Curtiss Vickery) responsible for oversight. The contract requires clinical perfusionists to provide cardiothoracic perfusion services in accordance with recognized clinical standards of care, with performance measured across six key metrics: Provider Quality Performance (98% acceptable quality level), Qualifications of Key Personnel (100% - all perfusionists must be certified), Patient Access (95% - perfusionists must be onsite during scheduled operating room hours and within 60 minutes when on call), Patient Safety (98% - incidents must be reported within 24 hours via VA Patient Safety Reporting System), Mandatory Training and Privacy Compliance (97% - all personnel must complete required training and maintain HIPAA compliance with zero breaches tolerated), and Documentation/Timesheet Compliance (95% - weekly timesheets submitted monthly to the COR). Surveillance methods include direct observation, periodic quarterly inspections, validated user complaints, random sampling, and contractor-provided documentation.
Performance is rated using a five-tier CPARS system (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) with corresponding definitions that emphasize whether performance meets contractual requirements and the effectiveness of corrective actions. The COR provides quarterly written progress reports to the Contracting Officer documenting compliance with all standards. If performance falls below acceptable quality levels, the CO issues formal notification and, if necessary, a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) requiring the contractor to provide a corrective action plan within a specified timeframe. The QASP is designated as a living document subject to revision through contract modification, with all changes coordinated between the Government and contractor. Documentation of both positive and negative performance feeds into the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for past performance evaluation.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C26326R0045_3.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C26326R0045 0002.pdf | ||
| 36C26326R0045 0001.pdf | ||
| 36C26326R0045_2.docx | DOCX document | |
| D.3 Attachment 3 - Contractor Rules of Behavior.pdf | ||
| 36C26326R0045_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| D.5 Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf | ||
| D.2 Attachment 2 - Organizational Conflict of Interest.pdf | ||
| D.1 Attachment 1 - Immigration and Nationality Act Requirement.pdf | ||
| 36C26326R0045.pdf |
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
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 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: Daniel Vagts
Organization or Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
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: Curtiss Vickery 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:
D.4 Attachment 4 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan
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. SAMPLE QASP PERFORMANCE REPORT DATE: __________________
Revision 03/09/2023 Page 3 of 12
Measures PWS Referen ce
Performance Requirement Standard Acceptable Quality Level
Surveillance Method
Met AQL/DID
NOT MEET
AQL-
CPARS
RATING/ADD
COMMENTS
Provider Quality Performance
4.6.4.1 All contract providers shall
provide clinical perfusion services per the PWS requirements and in accordance with recognized clinical standards of care.
All contract providers shall provide clinical perfusion services per the PWS reqs. & in accordance with recognized clinical standards of care.
98% meets Standards
Performance Monitoring (PM) data will be based on observations of Cardiothoracic Surgeons.
Quarterly
Qualifications of Key Personnel
4.6.4.2 All contract clinical
perfusionists provided meet the qualifications standards and abilities in accordance with the PWS requirements for experience, skills and proficiency in providing clinical perfusion services.
All Perfusionists shall be certified and compliant with all certifications
100% meets Standards
Annual Key Personnel re-certification documentation.
Annually
Patient Access (A) 4.6.4.3 Patient must receive treatment in a timely manner
Perfusionists shall be onsite and available during all scheduled OR hours and within 60 minutes of the facility when on call
95% meets Standards
Monthly review of Time and Attendance Sheets
Quarterly
Patient Safety 4.6.4.4 Patient safety incidents shall be reported using VA Patient Safety Reporting System. All incidents shall be reported immediately (within 24 hours)
All of patient safety incidents are reported using VA Patient Safety Reporting System within 24 hours of incident
98% meets Standards
Direct Observation and periodic inspection
Quarterly
Mandatory Training, Privacy, Confidentiality and
HIPAA
4.6.4.5 Contractor personnel shall
complete all required training on time per facility policy.
Contractor personnel are aware of all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, Confidentiality, and HIPAA and complies with all standards Zero breaches of privacy or confidentiality.
All contractor personnel shall comply with all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, Confidentiality, and HIPAA.
97% meets Standards
Periodic Inspection.
Contractor personnel shall provide evidence of annual training required by the facility, reports violations per VA Directive 6500.6.
Monthly
Documentation/Timesheet 4.6.4.6 Time Sheet Documentation to be completed weekly and turned in to COR for validation on the first week of the following month.
Monthly 95% meets Standards
Review of submitted timesheets.
Monthly
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 VA’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 VA. 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 VA’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 VA. 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 VA. 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).
UNSATISFACTORY:
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 VA. 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. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT
a. Frequency of Measurement. The frequency of measurement is defined in the contract or otherwise in this document. The government (COR or CO) will periodically analyze whether the frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.
b. Frequency of Performance Reporting. The COR shall communicate with the Contractor and will provide written reports to the Contracting Officer quarterly (or as outlined in the contract or COR delegation) to review Contractor performance.
10. 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
11. 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:
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).
UNSATISFACTORY: 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).
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
12. 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 Discrepancy 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 CDR below.
13. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT
a. Frequency of Measurement. The frequency of measurement is defined in the contract or otherwise in this document. The government (COR or CO) will periodically analyze whether the frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.
b. Frequency of Performance Reporting. The COR shall communicate with the Contractor and will provide written reports to the Contracting Officer quarterly (or as outlined in the contract or COR delegation) to review Contractor performance.
14. COR AND CONTRACTOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF QASP
SIGNED:
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
| 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. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .