QASP - PMI Services Kitchen Equipment VISn 2 Commissary.docx

D.1 QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR: Stephen Chow

CONTRACT NUMBER:

CONTRACT DESCRIPTION: Commercial kitchen and refrigeration equipment repair and preventative maintenance services.

CONTRACTORS NAME:

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. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

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. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. 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:

Telephone Number:

Email:

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: Stephen Chow Organization or Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs Email:

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s program manager for this contract.

Program Manager:

Email:

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level.

Method Penalty

CPM and QAE/COR meeting

5. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance method listed below in the administration of this QASP.

· DIRECT OBSERVATION. 100% surveillance: Unit Management Staff will observe on an ongoing basis contractor performance in the clinic and (OR) environment to ensure patient satisfaction and patient access standards are maintained. Deviations from performance requirements will be documented as they occur and reported to the Resource Manager for Patient Services and COR for validation.

· PERIODIC INSPECTION. Evaluates outcomes on a periodic basis. Inspections may be scheduled [Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or annually] or unscheduled, as required.

· VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. Relies on the patient to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated.

· RANDOM SAMPLING. Patient treatment files to be reviewed will be randomly selected on a quarterly basis. All reviews and reports will be conducted in compliance with VA Privacy and Information security standards. Designed to evaluate performance by randomly selecting and inspecting a sample of cases.

6. RATINGS

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. The following ratings shall be used:

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.

7. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

· ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE: The Government shall document positive performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action.

· UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE: When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case, the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

· When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the contractor’s program manager.

· The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR 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 CDR will also state how long after the receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the SOR. The Government shall review the contractor’s corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

· Any CDRs may become part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CS.

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT

5. DATES

6. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM (Describe in detail. Include reference to PWS Directive; attach continuation sheet if necessary.)

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.)

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

CONTRACTOR NOTIFIED

COR

CONTRACTING OFFICER

8. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

· Frequency of Measurement: During contract performance, the COR will periodically analyze whether the negotiated frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.

· Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings: The COR shall meet with the contractor quarterly to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment.

After Award the COR and the Contractor Program Manager shall sign this document.

Signature – Contractor Program Manager

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative