Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Fort Worth OPC Housekeeping Services

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. The Administrative Contract Specialist (ACS) will assist the CO with the post-award functions of the contract.

Assigned CO:

Assigned ACS:

Isela P. Loveless, Network Contracting Office (NCO)17 E-mail: Isela.Loveless@va.gov Telephone: (210) 694-6313

JOSEPH A. LEYTE, Network Contracting Office (NCO)17 E-mail: Joseph.Leyte@va.gov Telephone: (210) 694-6315

Organization or Agency: NETWORK CONTRACTING OFFICE (NCO) 17

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: CATHRINE A. ENGLAND Administrative Officer E-mail: Cathrine.England@va.gov Telephone: (817) 730-0002

Organization or Agency: VISN 17 VA FORT WORTH VA OUTPATIENT CLINIC

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

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

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 Government shall use these standards (section 6) 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.

mailto:Daryl.Stewart@va.gov mailto:Joseph.Leyte@va.gov mailto:Cathrine.England@va.gov

5. METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE:

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

Each method listed below applies to all performance standards listed for the specific Task.

a. Direct Observation. Direct observation shall be performed periodically or through surveillance.

b. Periodic Inspection. Evaluate outcomes on a periodic basis. Inspections may be scheduled Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Annually or unscheduled, as required.

c. Progress or status meetings.

d. Complaints. Complaints from agency personnel shall be passed to the Contractor's quality control inspector (QCI) for correction.

e. Complaints. Complaints from beneficiaries shall be provided to agency personnel then it shall be passed to the Contractor's quality control inspector (QCI) for correction.

f. COR or Designee conducts site visits: The COR will complete visits at each contracted service area to verify contract compliance.

STANDARD: Performance shall meet or exceed the thresholds as measured for each performance objective. The COR shall notify the contracting officer for appropriate action in accordance with FAR 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items, if any of the above service areas exceeds the customer complaint thresholds.

5.1 PROCEDURES: The COR shall periodically inspect to ensure Contractor compliance with the appropriate section of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The COR or designee shall record results of inspection, noting the date and time of inspection. If inspection indicates unacceptable performance, the COR shall notify the CO of the deficiencies. The CO will notify the Contractor in writing and will request correction of the noted deficiencies within the specified time period.

Contractor shall be given notification to correct the deficiencies within a reasonable amount of time, on a case-by-case basis. The CO shall have the final authority on the amount of time the Contractor has to correct the deficiency.

6. PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Objective Threshold PWS Reference

Method of Assessment Incentive Disincentive

Provide total housekeeping cleaning services for the Fort Worth VA Outpatient Clinic.

Meet TJC and VA standards of cleanliness

Section:

3.0 thru 4.3.2

Review of work and approval by COR

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Ensure training requirements b y vendor are met

Meet training requirements of Contractor

Section:

9.0 10.3

Review of training to ensure competencies

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Ensure training requirements for the VA are met

Meet V H A training requirements

Section:

5.1.2 5.2 6.1

7.1 thru 7.2 8.2

Provide completed course tests

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Ensure VA security measures are met. Employees must have background check completed before starting work

Meet VA Security Policies Section: 7.1 8.2

Review of Security and Badges for each employee

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Ensure contingency plan in place for emergency

Provide a written plan for ensuring work is completed in case of an emergency

Section: 12.0 thru 12.1.4 Review of monthly reports and approval by investigator

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Conduct inspections to guarantee compliance

Weekly Report Section: 13.1

13.5 thru 13.7

Review inspections and corrections

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Track weekly inspections Bench Marking Section: 13.7 Review weekly report Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

Have no more than 5 complaints in any 1-month period

Proactively eliminate complaint

Sections:

13.7

Periodic sampling and validated customer complaints as monitored by Project Mgr.

Positive past performance CPARs ratings

Negative past performance CPARs ratings

7. RATINGS

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. In addition, 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. In addition, 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, which corrective action is 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. In addition, 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 has proposed actions appear only marginally effective or 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 affected the GOVERNMENT. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual 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 affected 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).

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. Acceptable Performance: The Government shall document performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action.

b. Unacceptable performance: When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the Contractor in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file and provide a copy to the CO.

When the COR determines, formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and present it to the Contracting Officer (CO). In turn, the CO shall present the CDR to the Contractor’s contracting personnel.

The Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR shall 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 shall 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.

Any CDRs shall become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CO.

9. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT: During contract performance, the COR shall periodically analyze whether the negotiated frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.

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

Signature of Offer / Contractor Signature of COR

Name and Title of Signer (Type or Print) / Date Name of COR (Type or Print) / Date