D.6 QASP final.docx

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.

Assigned CO:

Organization or Agency:

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: Luis-Enrique Davila Organization or Agency: James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, VAMC, 10468

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

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

Primary: Luis-Enrique Davila Alternate: William Schimmer

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. INCENTIVES/DEDUCTS

The Government shall use past performance as incentives. Incentives shall be based on ratings received on the performance standards (Inclusion of any monetary incentives requires approval through the Department’s Senior Procurement Executive (SPE).

6. 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: (if this method is used, define how surveillance will be accomplished.)

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Inspections scheduled and reported quarterly per COR delegation or as needed. (Define what and how often it will be inspected. For example, 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. If this method is used, explain how data will be collected and reported.

d. RANDOM SAMPLING. If this method is used, what and how often it will be sampled. (For example, 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.)

e. Verification and/or documentation provided by Contractor. Review PWS and if this method of surveillance is selected, define how documentation will be verified and how assessment will be conducted. (For example, off-site contracts may require the contractor to provide information on services provided to patients).

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Reference Performance Requirement

Method Incentive

Favorable contactor performance evaluation.

Favorable contactor performance evaluation.

7. RATINGS

Metrics and methods are designed to determine rating for a given standard and acceptable quality level. The following ratings shall be used:

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.

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.

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.

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).