MFT_18-07_(Linen)_QASP,_11_Jul_17.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Hospital Laundry Services

Medical Treatment Facility, David Grant Medical Center

Travis AFB, CA

11 Jul 17

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 3

1.1 Purpose 3

1.2 Contractor Performance Management Approach 3

1.3 Performance Management Strategy 4

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4

2.1 Contracting Officer 4

2.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative 4

2.3 Quality Assurance Evaluators Error!

Bookmark not defined.

3. METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE 5

3.1 Surveillance Techniques 5

3.2 Inspection Instructions 6

3.3 Acceptable Quality Levels 6

4 SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE 6

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION 6

6 REMEDIES FOR NON-PERFORMANCE 7

7 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICES 8

EXHIBIT A – EXAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM 9

EXHIBIT B - EXAMPLE PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 10

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

1 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to provide a standard of surveillance for monitoring bulk laundry/linen services throughout the Continental United States (CONUS). The Contractor shall be required to provide bulk laundry cleaning services, including pickup and delivery, for laundry generated at CONUS Medical Treatment Facilities (MTFs) for the Army, Navy, and Air Force. This QASP is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) entitled “Bulk Laundry Services for DoD CONUS Medical Treatment Facilities”. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Government customer will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the Contractor. The QASP provides the approach the Government will use to conduct surveillance over the performance aspects of this requirement.

The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with performance metrics set forth in the contract documents, that the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract, and that the Government only pays for the acceptable level of services received.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the Contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the Contractor’s Quality Management System (QMS), and to ensure that the Government pays only for the level of services received. The QASP is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the Contractor’s QMS to assure they are timely, effective, and results are performed as specified in the contract. The QASP is not intended to duplicate the Contractor’s internal quality management efforts.

1.2 Contractor Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the Contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the Government customer to monitor and manage the Contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management. This analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the Contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional Quality Assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance based approach enables the Contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (Federal, State, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” 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 and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The Contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The Contractor measures that quality through the Contractor’s QMS. Quality Control is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by Contractor employees or by subcontractors. The Contractor’s QMS 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 develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated Government representative. This QASP enables the Government to take advantage of the Contractor’s QMS program. This report shall be available at Government request.

The Contractor will be responsible for making any required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 Contracting Officer

The Contracting Officer (KO/CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Government’s Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the Contractor. The KO/CO will designate one COR as the Government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives (e.g., Quality Assurance Evaluator) serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the Contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the KO/CO in subsequent task orders.

2.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative

The COR is designated in writing by the KO/CO to act as their authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Any changes that the Contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the KO/CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms 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.

2.3 Functional Requirements Evaluator Designee

Functional Requirements Evaluator Designee (FRED) play a key role in contract administration.

They provide technical assistance to the COR. They perform the actual contract surveillance and report to the COR. Some of the key contract administration duties of the FRED include -

Evaluating and documenting the Contractor’s performance in accordance with the QASP

Making recommendations to the COR for the validation of satisfactorily completed work and for equitable adjustment reductions and other administrative actions based on unsatisfactory or non-performed work

Assisting the COR in identifying necessary changes to the contract, preparing Government estimates, conducting QA meetings, approving submittals, maintaining work files

Promptly furnishing the COR with any requests for changes, deviations, or waivers to the contract (whether generated by Government personnel or Contractor personnel)

The COR and the FRED only have authority delegated by the KO/CO. The COR and the FRED have has no authority to allow deviations from contract requirements. The COR and the FRED have no authority to direct or interfere with the methods of performance by the Contractor or to issue modifications directly to any of the Contractor's personnel unless methods being used are unsafe.

3 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

3.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the Government to evaluate Contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance are:

100% Inspection. The COR will conduct 100% inspection of items 1-3 in the attached

Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) (Exhibit B), which includes – o Provide contingency, exposure, and health/safety plans o Comply with security requirements o Comply with turn-around (pick-up and delivery) times

Random Inspection. The COR may conduct random inspections for items 4-5 in the attached PRS (Exhibit B), which includes – o Delivery of finished articles shall conform to hygienically clean standards, finish, and appearance requirements o Delivery of finished articles shall conform to the packaging and transporting requirements

Customer Feedback – The COR will collect customer complaints regarding performance of PRS items 4-5, which includes – o Delivery of finished articles shall conform to hygienically clean standards, finish, and appearance requirements o Delivery of finished articles shall conform to the packaging and transporting requirements

A mutual effort will be made to resolve any problems/issues identified.

The level of surveillance for items 1-3 of the PRS will be as frequently as the service occurs. The level of surveillance for items 4-5 of the PRS will be as frequently as daily, monthly, or as needed. An analysis of the results will determine if the Contractor met the standards or did not meet the standards identified in the PWS/contract.

3.2 Inspection

3.2.1. The Government has the right to inspect and test all services called for by the contract, to the extent practicable at all times and places during the term of the contract. The Government shall perform inspections and tests in a manner that will not unduly delay the work.

3.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

The Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in the PRS (Exhibit B) for Contractor performance are structured to allow the Contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

3.3.1. The AQL consists of the performance standards established for the services required by the Government to meet contract requirements. The AQL will be measurable and structured to permit an assessment of the Contractor’s performance.

4. SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE

4.1. Successful performance can be incentivized with favorable performance ratings.

4.2. Acceptable service performance is demonstrated by an accepted and executed certified invoice and receiving report, as applicable.

5. QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1. Effective contract surveillance relies on the COR identifying and documenting discrepancies during performance of routine daily services, or through the Contractor’s QMS.

The COR will report discrepancies to the Contractor for timely resolution.

5.2. The COR will maintain a complete QA file which he/she will retain for the life of the contract. Information in the QA file will be considered when completing the annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report.

5.3. Documented surveillance will consist of inspections performed by the COR. All paperwork that supports contract surveillance such as details of inspections or data gathering, conversations or meetings with the Contractor, notes and comments that support inspection paperwork, to include quality assurance surveillance reports.

5.4. All documentation resulting from surveillance will be made a part of the contract file.

The COR must keep the documentation files during the surveillance period, but at the conclusion of the contract and as directed by the KO/CO, the COR must give the files to the KO/CO for inclusion in the official contract file.

6. REMEDIES FOR NON-PERFORMANCE

6.1. Discrepancies will be identified and formally documented using a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) or Contract Non-Conformance Report (NCR). This report clearly identifies the discrepancy. The Contractor will be provided the opportunity to submit proposed corrective action to resolve the discrepancy. The COR will review proposed corrective action and determine whether or not it is acceptable and whether or not the discrepancy has been corrected. If the discrepancy has been resolved, the COR will notify the Contractor and document the quality assurance surveillance checklist. If repeat findings occur without successful resolve, the KO will then issue a Cure or Show Cause notice, depending on the severity of the issue.

6.2. The COR will notify the Contractor upon initial discovery of discrepancies via a CDR or NCR. If the issue is not satisfactory resolved, the COR will then notify the KO/CO of the unacceptable performance. The KO/CO will then inform the Contractor of the performance issue. The KO/CO may require the Contractor to re-perform the services to conform with contract requirements at no additional cost to the Government.

6.3. When unacceptable performance cannot be corrected by re-performance, the Government may require the Contractor to take action necessary to ensure future performance conforms to contract requirements.

6.4. The Government may, by separate contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge the Contractor any cost incurred that is directly related to the performance of such service, or issue:

a. Cure Notice

b. Show Cause

c. Terminate the contract for convenience of the Government

d. Terminate the contract for cause

7. CERTIFICATION OF SERVICES.

Certification of services is performed by the COR via Invoicing, Receipt, Acceptance and Property Transfer (iRAPT) or Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF).

EXHIBIT A – EXAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check all that apply for the reporting period):

_____100% Inspection _____Random Inspection _____Customer Feedback

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

_____Monthly

_____Quarterly _____As Needed

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: ________________

EXHIBIT B – EXAMPLE PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE ACCEPTABLE

QUALITY LEVEL

REFERENCE SURVEILLANCE

METHOD

PERFORMANCE

INCENTIVE or

DISINCENTIVE

Meet and maintain pick-up and delivery schedule.

No more than 1 scheduled pick-up or delivery time missed per month. Gate delay greater than 30 minutes does not constitute a delay.

Section I, Para 1.1.1., a., b. & Appendix D

COR maintain log / Annual review (100% Inspection)

Performance above or below the standard will be documented in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

Provide and maintain contractor-furnished vehicles and government-furnished carts in clean and operable conditions to meet and HLAC infection control procedures and standards.

0 Defects. Failure will require re-performance.

Section I, Para

1.1.4. a., b., c

COR maintain log (100% Inspection).

Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Perform serviceable repairs on linen items and return to use within 5 working days.

98% of articles picked up are returned to the government in a serviceable condition within the allotted timeframe.

Section I, Para 1.1.5.,.a.,b.

Random Sampling / Customer Feedback.

Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Perform and provide Washroom Test Services from NAILM or IFI- tensile strength and whiteness retention IAW lab instructions.

0 Defects. Corrective action must be taken within five days and retest when deficiencies occur.

Section I, Para 1.1.6.a., b., c

Maintain log 100% Inspection

Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Provide laundry articles in properly packaged units

No more than 1 delivery to the medical center can be packaged improperly per month.

Section I, Para 1.1.7.,e & Appendix C

Maintain log 100% Inspection

Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS

Provide and maintain dust and vermin-free conditions at the laundry facility IAW HLAC and DGMC infection Control standards of quality of cleanliness and appearance.

Facility must be equipped and ventilated IAW local, state, and federal requirements.

Only 3 minor defects may be observed during yearly Infection Control visits to the laundry facility.

Contractor shall respond in writing with corrective action taken.

Section I, Para 1.1.7.,a

Periodic visits Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS

Laundry is delivered free from soil, stains and odor, free of lint and soap residue and other foreign matter.

0 Defects. Failure will require re-performance.

Section I, Para 1.1.7

Maintain log 100% Inspection

Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS

Maintain 10% maximum weight variance for total monthly bulk weight for soiled linen, applied once a month.

0 Defects. Section I, Para 1.1.8

Maintain log 100% Inspection

Contractor will replace lost or damaged item with an equal in quality and price item.