QASP Teleradiology VHSO_4-30-26 Rev.docx

DOCX document 39 KB Posted

Attached to
AMENDMENT Q522-- VHSO Teleradiology Services- Fayetteville (564)
Solicitation number
00007
Issued by

About this file

This is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for teleradiology services to be provided to the Veterans Healthcare System of the Ozarks (VHSO). The QASP establishes systematic methods for evaluating contractor performance against stated contract requirements and defines roles and responsibilities for government oversight.

The plan identifies eight primary performance standards with specific acceptable quality levels: timeliness of routine exam reports (within 24 hours, 98% AQL); timeliness of STAT exam reports (within one hour, 98% AQL); provider quality performance verified through annual OPPE and peer review (100% AQL); communication of critical results to ordering providers within one hour (100% AQL); qualifications requiring all contract physicians to be board certified or board eligible (100% AQL with zero deviations); scope of practice compliance (100% AQL); current licensing and certification maintenance (100% AQL with zero deviations); completion of mandatory VA privacy, security, and HIPAA training (100% AQL); and privacy and confidentiality compliance (100% AQL with zero deviations). Surveillance methods include direct observation by VHSO radiology staff, monthly or periodic inspections, validated user complaints, random sampling, and contractor-provided documentation. The Contracting Officer is Corey Labbe (Network Contracting Office 16), and the Contracting Officer's Representative is Lisa Bujarski (Veterans Healthcare System of the Ozarks). Performance ratings are assigned using the CPARS system with five categories: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory. The document includes provisions for Contract Reports when performance falls below acceptable quality levels and requires corrective action plans.

View the file

Other files

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

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: Corey Labbe, Network Contracting Office 16 Organization or Agency: VHA Regional Procurement Office (Network Contracting Office-16)

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: Lisa Bujarski Organization or Agency: Veteran’s Healthcare System of the Ozarks

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:

Attachment D.1 – 36C25626Q0022 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

RFQ:

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. Daily monitoring of performance from VHSO staff.

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Inspections scheduled and reported per COR delegation or as needed. Frequency: Monthly, Quarterly or Annually.

c. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS.

d. RANDOM SAMPLING.

e. VERIFICATION AND/OR DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR.

QASP PERFORMANCE REPORT DATE: ___________________

Measures
PWS

Reference

Performance Requirement

Standard
Acceptable Quality Level
Surveillance

Method Met AQL/DID NOT MEET AQL-

CPARS RATING/ADD COMMENTS

Timeliness of Reports for Routine Exams
4.7.3.1
Interpreted, finalized, electronically signed within 24 Hrs, and none >7 days
100%
98%
Direct Observation: Monitored by VHSO Radiology Staff thru Daily Reports
Provider Quality Performance
4.7.3.2
All contract physician(s) shall perform in accordance with clinical standards
Annual OPPE/Peer Review documentation for all (100%) staff providing services under the contract. All staff (100%) meet Standards
98%
Annual Peer Reviews and annual OPPE review and incidental Direct Observation that could lead to FPPE
Timeliness of Reports for STAT Exams
4.7.3.1
Interpreted, finalized, electronically signed within One Hour of Assignment to Teleradiology
100%
98%
Direct Observation: Monitored by VHSO Radiology Staff thru Daily Reports and Complaints from ED
Communication of Critical Results
4.6.1.1.4
Critical results coded per VHSO Policy and communicated to ordering provider by telephone within one hour; communication documented in report.
100%
100%
Periodic Inspection: Monthly audits of EHR by VHSO Radiology Staff
Qualifications of Key Personnel
4.7.3.3
All Contractor’s physician(s) shall be Board Certified or Board Eligible in accordance with ACR Standards.
All (100%) contract physician(s) are board certified or Board Eligible.
100% No deviations accepted.
Upon award and periodically for recredentialing.
Scope of Practice/Privileging
4.7.3.4
Contract physician(s) perform within their individual scopes of practice/privileging
All (100%) contract physician(s) perform within their scope of practice/privileges 100% of the time.
100% Contractor’s physician(s) perform within their scope of practice/privileges 100% of the time.
Random Sampling of records during performance of annual OPPE; peer review and Direct Observation
Maintains licensing, registration, and certification
4.7.3.6
Updated Licensing, registration and certification shall be provided as they are renewed. Licensing and registration information kept current.
All (100%) licensing, registration(s) and certification(s) for contract physician(s) shall be provided as they are renewed. Licensing and registration information kept current.
100% licensing, registration(s) and certification(s) for Contractor’s physician(s) shall be provided as they are renewed. Licensing and registration information kept current. No acceptable deviation.
Periodic Inspection: Upon award and annually or during credentialing processes
Mandatory Training
4.7.3.7
All contract radiologists must complete VA-mandated annual Privacy and Security (including HIPAA) training prior to performing services or being granted access to VA information systems or patient information, in accordance with VHA Directive 1605.01, VHA Directive 6500, and federal HIPAA regulations.
All (100%) of required training is complete on time by Contractor’s physician(s).
100% completions

Periodic Inspection: Annual Review of Training by VHSO Staff

Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA
4.7.3.8
Contractor is 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 (100%) Contractor’s physician(s) comply with all laws, regulations, policies and procedures relating to Privacy, Confidentiality and HIPAA
100% compliance

Periodic Inspection; Contractor shall provide evidence of annual training required by the facility, reports violations per VA Handbook 6500.6

6. 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/documents/CPARS-Guidance.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 thecontractual 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).

7. 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 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 CR on the following page.

8. 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

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