Attachment6.pdf

PDF 493 KB Posted

Attached to
Clinical Trials Monitoring Service
Solicitation number
N02-CM-01008-03
Issued by

About this file

Contractor Assessment Report/Performance Indicators and Standards

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
RFP N02-CM-01008-03.pdf PDF
Attachment14.pdf PDF
Attachment10.pdf PDF
Attachment19.pdf PDF
Attachment15.pdf PDF
Attachment3.pdf PDF
Attachment5.pdf PDF
Attachment18.pdf PDF
Attachment2.pdf PDF
Attachment1.pdf PDF
Attachment4.pdf PDF
Attachment7.pdf PDF
Attachment16.pdf PDF
Attachment13.pdf PDF
Attachment20.pdf PDF
Attachment8.pdf PDF
Attachment9.pdf PDF
Attachment11.pdf PDF
Attachment12.pdf PDF
Attachment5.pdf PDF
Attachment3.pdf PDF
Attachment2.pdf PDF
Attachment1.pdf PDF
Attachment15.rtf RTF text file
Attachment6.pdf PDF
RFP N02-CM-01008-03.pdf PDF
Show all 26

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

CONTRACTOR ASSESSMENT REPORT

For Performance Base Monitoring

FINAL REPORT INTERIM REPORT (Check one)

REPORTING PERIOD: (from) (to)

CONTRACTING OFFICE ( Location):

CONTRACT NUMBER:

CONTRACTOR NAME:

ADDRESS:

CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:

CONTRACT AWARD DATE:

CONTRACT EXPIRATION DATE:

CONTRACT VALUE: $

DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENT (Title):

RATINGS

Summarize contractor performance and circle the number which corresponds to the rating for each rating category. (See attached Rating Guidelines). Comments are required for a poor or outstanding rating.

SYSTEM OPERATIONS Rating: 0 1 2 3 4 5 Comments:

SYSTEM MAINTENANCE Rating: 0 1 2 3 4 5 Comments:

CONDUCTING AUDITS Rating: 0 1 2 3 4 5 Comments:

REPORTING FINDINGS Rating: 0 1 2 3 4 5 Comments:

FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING Rating: 0 1 2 3 4 5 Comments:

NIH PROJECT OFFICER (name):

SIGNATURE:

Phone: FAX:

E-mail Address:

Date:

Attachment 6: Contractor Assessment Report June 9, 2009 Page 1 of 4

SUMMARY RATINGS:

QUALITY: COST CONTROL:

TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE: BUSINESS RELATIONS:

OVERALL: _________

CONTRACTING OFFICER (name):

SIGNATURE:

Phone: FAX:

E-mail Address:

Date:

Attachment 6: Contractor Assessment Report June 9, 2009 Page 2 of 4

RATING GUIDELINES

Summarize contractor performance in each of the rating areas.

Assign each area a rating of 0 (Unsatisfactory), 1 (Poor), 2 (Fair), 3 (Good), 4 (Excellent), 5 (Outstanding).

Contractor Assessment Report Performance Indicators and Standards

INDICATORS

ø STANDARDS ù

SYSTEM OPERATIONS

SYSTEM MAINTENANCE CONDUCTING AUDITS REPORTING FINDINGS

FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING

0 -Unsatisfactory Contractor is not in compliance with two or more of the Task I requirements as outlined in the SOW and QASP related to: 1. establishing and maintaining a web-based protocol patient registration system; 2. maintaining, enhancing and revising a computerized protocol patient data capture system, including procedures for electronic data transfer meeting specified requirements and/or security guidelines; 3.

Electronic edit check utilization; 4. Data reception facility experiences excessive down-time (>48 hours of unscheduled down-time per year).

Contractor is not in compliance with maintenance requirements. System is not backed up at least weekly and/or database files are not remotely stored.

Contractor is not in compliance with two or more of the audit related activities associated with Tasks 2-5 as outlined in the SOW and QASP.

Contractor is not in compliance and is jeopardizing achievement of contract objectives. Audit reports for Tasks I-V are submitted by the due date less than 75 % of the time and/or reports do not conform to the requirements outlined in the

SOW.

Contractor is not in compliance and is jeopardizing achievement of contract objectives.

1-Poor Contractor is not in compliance with one of the Task I requirements as outlined in the SOW and QASP related to: 1. establishing and maintaining a web-based protocol patient registration system;

2. maintaining, enhancing and revising a computerized protocol patient data capture system, including procedures for electronic data transfer meeting specified requirements and/or security guidelines; 3. Electronic edit check utilization; 4. Data reception facility experiences excessive down-time (>40 but < 48 hours of unscheduled down-time per year).

There are lapses in compliance with maintenance requirements. System is not always backed up at least weekly (> 5 lapses in weekly back-ups per year) and/or database files are not always remotely stored.

Contractor is not in compliance with one of the audit related activities associated with Tasks 2-5 as outlined in the SOW and QASP.

Audit reports for Tasks I-V are submitted by the due date 75 – 79% of the time and/or reports do not conform to the requirements outlined in SOW.

Contractor’s financial management system is not robust to permit costing out by various activities and/or contractor is having major difficulties managing costs effectively.

2-Fair Contractor is experiencing difficulties but is meeting all of the Task I requirements as outlined in the SOW and QASP related to: 1.

establishing and maintaining a web-based protocol patient registration system; 2. maintaining, enhancing and revising a computerized protocol patient data capture system, including procedures for electronic data transfer meeting specified requirements and/or security guidelines; 3.

Electronic edit check utilization; 4. Data reception facility experiences excessive down-time (>32 but < 40 hours of unscheduled down-time per year).

There are lapses in compliance with maintenance requirements. System is not always backed up at least weekly (4 lapses in a year) and/or database files are not always remotely stored.

Contractor is experiencing major difficulty but is meeting all requirements related to audit related activities associated with Tasks 2-5 as outlined in the SOW and QASP.

Audit reports for Tasks I-V are submitted by the due date 80 – 84% of the time and/or reports partially conform to the requirements outlined in the

SOW.

Contractor’s financial management system is adequate, but there is some difficulty in costing out various activities and/or there are some problems with managing costs effectively.

Financial reports require manual queries and take > 3 day to obtain.

Attachment 6: Contractor Assessment Report June 9, 2009 Page 3 of 4

INDICATORS

ø STANDARDS ù

SYSTEM OPERATIONS

SYSTEM MAINTENANCE CONDUCTING AUDITS REPORTING FINDINGS

FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING

3-Good Contractor is in compliance with all of the Task I requirements as outlined in the SOW and QASP related to: 1. establishing and maintaining a web-based protocol patient registration system; 2.

maintaining, enhancing and revising a computerized protocol patient data capture system, including procedures for electronic data transfer meeting specified requirements and/or security guidelines; 3. Electronic edit check utilization; 4. Data reception facility experiences excessive down-time (>24 but < 32 hours of unscheduled down-time per year).

There are rare lapses in compliance with maintenance requirements. System is not always backed up at least weekly (3 lapses in a year) and/or database files are not always remotely stored.

Contractor is experiencing some difficulty but is meeting all requirements related to audit related activities associated with Tasks 2-5 as outlined in the SOW and QASP.

Audit reports for Tasks I-V are submitted by the due date 85 - 89% of the time and conform to the requirements outlined in the

SOW.

Contractor’s financial accounting system is adequate. Costs are generally being managed effectively. Financial reports may require additional queries but the data can be obtained within 3 days.

4-Excellent Contractor is in compliance with all of the Task I requirements as outlined in the SOW and QASP related to: 1. establishing and maintaining a web-based protocol patient registration system; 2.

maintaining, enhancing and revising a computerized protocol patient data capture system, including procedures for electronic data transfer meeting specified requirements and/or security guidelines; 3. Electronic edit check utilization; 4. Data reception facility experiences excessive down-time (>16 but < 24 hours of unscheduled down-time per year).

There is excellent compliance with maintenance requirements. System is rarely not backed up weekly (2 lapses in a year). Database files are always remotely stored.

Contractor rarely experiences difficulty in meeting all requirements related to audit related activities associated with Tasks 2-5 as outlined in the SOW and QASP.

Audit reports for Tasks I-V are timely 90 - 94% of the time and conform to the requirements outlined in SOW.

Contractor’s financial accounting system is robust and enables costing out of various activities without difficulty. Costs are managed effectively. Financial reports can be obtained >1 but < 3 days.

5-Outstanding Contractor is in compliance with all of the Task I requirements as outlined in the SOW and QASP related to: 1. establishing and maintaining a web-based protocol patient registration system; 2.

maintaining, enhancing and revising a computerized protocol patient data capture system, including procedures for electronic data transfer meeting specified requirements and/or security guidelines; 3. Electronic edit check utilization; 4. Data reception facility is available 24 hours per day except in extremely rare circumstances (< 16 hours per year).

There is outstanding compliance with maintenance requirements. System is always backed up weekly.

Database files are always remotely stored.

Contractor is always successful at meeting all requirements related to audit related activities associated with Tasks 2-5 as outlined in the SOW and QASP.

Audit reports for Tasks I-V are timely > 95% of the time and conform to the requirements outlined in the SOW.

Contractor’s financial accounting system is robust, enables costing out of various activities without difficulty. Costs are effectively managed. Financial reports are available upon request without delay (less than 24 hours).

Attachment 6: Contractor Assessment Report June 9, 2009 Page 4 of 4

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