Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Kitchen Janitorial Services for VA Palo Alto Health Care System

1. Purpose

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is a government-developed and applied document used to make systematic quality assurance methods used in the administration of the performance-based service acquisition

(PBSA) standards included in this contract. 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.

2. Authority

Authority to issue this QASP is provided under Federal Acquisition Clause (FAR) 52.212-4(a) Inspection and

Acceptance, which provided for inspections and acceptance of the articles, services, and documentation called for in the contract to be accomplished by the contracting officer or a duly appointed representative.

3 Scope

The contractor, and not the government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract. The QASP is put in place to provide government surveillance oversight of the contractor’s quality control efforts to assure that they are timely, effective, and delivering the results specified in the contract. The QASP is not a part of the contract, nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor’s quality control plan.

4. Government Resources

The following definitions for government resources are applicable to this plan:

Contracting Officer

A person duly appointed with the authority to enter, administer, or terminate contracts and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the government.

Contracting officer’s Representative (COR)

An individual designated in writing by the contracting officer to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. The source and authority for a COR is from the contracting officer. COR limitations are contained in the written letter of designation.

5. Responsibilities

The government resources shall have responsibilities for the implementation of this QASP as follows:

Contracting Officer

The contracting officer ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting and ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the contracting officer who assures that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The contracting officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

COR

The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures 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 contracting officer for action.

Documentation

The COR will, in addition to providing documentation to the contracting officer, maintain a complete quality assurance file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the government’s performance of the quality assurance function, including the originals of all surveillance activity checklists. All such records will be retained for the life of this contract. The COR shall forward these records to the contracting officer at termination or completion of the contract.

6. Methods of Surveillance

The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used in the administration of this QASP.

Periodic Surveillance by the COR

The COR periodically inspects the contractor results to ensure the contractual requirements are met.

Customer complaint

The COR is the point of contact and will collect all customer complaints. The COR will review all complaints and contact the originator to determine the validity of any claims. Customer complaints will become a permanent part of the COR surveillance records.

100% Inspections

Complete evaluation of the performance element.

Random Sampling

Method used to evaluate performance by randomly selecting and inspecting a sample of cases.

7. Identified QA Surveillance Tasks

The following PBSA items are identified within the contract performance work statement and will be monitored by period surveillance from the COR and customer complaints in the event that a task is not be adequately performed.

8. Performance Indicators (Measures). Contractor performance will be rated/evaluated by the COR or other authorized designee using the following metrics in the table below. The contractor’s performance under the terms and conditions of this contract will be based on how successfully the contractor executes the tasks/deliverables listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). At a minimum, the contractor must complete the required tasks and deliverables that are contained within the Performance Work Statement for this requirement.

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

PERFORMANCE METRICS KITCHEN SERVICES

PALO ALTO VA MEDICAL CENTER

TASK NAME

& PWS

REFERENCE

TASK

DESCRIPTION

SCHEDULE,

EXPLANTION,

PERFORMANCE

STANDARD

Acceptable

Quality Levels

(AQL)

INCENTIVES/

DISINCENTIVES FOR

MEETING/

NOT MEETING

AQL

Weekly inspections

PWS 8.2

Weekly inspections by the COR, EMS

Supervisor/s, VA inspector/s, or government inspector/s.

Inspections will be done early morning check the work performed the night before. Inspection needs to meet EMS sanitation standards.

100%

(Contractor meets frequency and duration of schedule as outlined)

1,2,3, &

Quarterly Contractor

Performance and Quality

Control Meeting

Monthly performance review

PWS 8.2

Meeting with the contractor to review the quality of work performance based on the inspection report feedback from the FNS manager.

Monthly TEAMS meeting to ensure contractor is meeting the EMS sanitation standards.

100%;

Contractor will correct deficiencies from Contractor

QA plan, or from

Government inspection feedback.

1,2,3, & Quarterly

Contractor Performance and Quality Control

Meeting

Contractor weekly QA inspection report

PWS 8.2

Contractor

Manager inspect their own quality of work and send a report to the

COR.

COR will review the quality report weekly to make sure the contractor meets the contract requirements.

100% (Contractor meets schedule and work quality requirements)

1,2,3, & Quarterly

Contractor Performance and Quality Control

Meeting

Incentive/Disincentives for Meeting/Not Meeting AQL

1. Positive and negative performance will be documented locally (contract file) and/or in the appropriate contractor performance assessment reporting system/database.

2. Noncompliance to contract standards will be corrected at no cost to the government. The government reserves the right and may elect to measure/document negative performance through utilization of a performance report and/or a contract discrepancy report.

3. The contractor shall respond in writing to the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) to all notifications of failure to meet acceptable quality levels within 5 days of issuance by the Contracting Officer Representative and/or the Contracting Officer. The contractor’s response shall include the corrective action taken to rectify the problem and the proposed measure to preclude the recurrence of the problem.

The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix includes performance standards. The Government will use these standards to determine Contractor performance and will compare Contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

9. RATINGS

Metrics and methods are designed to determine rating for a given standard and acceptable quality level.

Metrics and methods are also designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. The following ratings shall be used:

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 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 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

10. Documenting Performance

a. ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

If contractual terms and conditions are being met and/or exceeded documentation is not necessarily required. However positive performance by the contractor will be referenced and/or documented if/when the Quarterly Contractor Performance and Quality Control Meeting is held. If the total contract cost exceeds the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) a CPAR’s (Contractor Performance

Assessment Reporting System) report is required where contractor performance information will be recorded.

b. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR will inform the Contractor. This notification will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. Formal reporting may be done through generation of a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) if the issue cannot be rectified by other means.

When the COR determines that formal written communication and reporting is required the COR will prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and will present it to the appropriate Contractor representative.

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 receipt the Contractor must present this corrective action plan back to the COR. The Government will review the Contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, other non-payment actions, or other actions deemed necessary by the CO.

The government reserves the right to document negative performance as stipulated above if/when a

Quarterly Contractor Performance and Quality Control Meeting is held. If a CPARS report is required contractor performance will also be annotated in this database.

11. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

During contract performance, the COR will take periodic measurements as specified in the AQL column of the Performance Standards Summary Matrix and will analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.