QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

For: Patient Porter Services

Contract Number: ________________(enter after contract award)

Contract Description: The Contractor shall provide Hospital Patient Porters for the Department of Veterans Affairs – South Texas Veterans Health Care System at the Audie L. Murphy Veterans Memorial Hospital and Campus, 7400 Merton Minter, San Antonio, Texas 78229.

The Hospital Patient Porters shall serve as the liaison between the patients and the staff of the Health Care System as a Greeter and/or a Tour Guide. The Contractor shall provide a channel through which patients can seek assistance to meet unresolved needs and works with healthcare providers/administrative support staff, to optimize the comprehensive experience of Veterans and their family members.

Contractor’s name: ______________ (hereafter referred to as the contractor).

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. 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: Shannon Hodgson

Organization or Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

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: Marcos Montes

c. Other Key Government Personnel –

Assigned Contract Specialist: Dayna Cantu

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

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

a. Program Manager (for Contractor) - __________________

b. Other Contractor Personnel - _______________________ Title: __________________________

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 Performance Work Statement (PWS) includes performance standards. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

Measure (ID)

PWS

Reference Performance Requirement

Acceptable Quality Level

Surveillance Method Incentive

1 11.1

The Contractor supervisor shall immediately notify the COR and the VA Police for investigation of claims.

Corrective actions to resolve all substantiated claims shall commence immediately. All substantiated claims shall be settled within fourteen (14) working days unless extenuating circumstances warrant additional time and is authorized by the Contracting Officer.

95% Direct Observation, Random Sampling

Favorable contractor performance evaluation.

2 14.3

The Contractor shall immediately notify the VA of any incidents involving injury to VA patients/ staff/ volunteers/ guests within 2 hours.

95% Direct Observation, Random Sampling

Favorable contractor performance evaluation.

3 14.6

The Contractor shall notify the COR, in writing within 24 hours of any complaints made by the patients with regards to transportation services and will address/make contact on all complaints timely by COB the day the complaint is made.

95% Direct Observation, Random Sampling

Favorable contractor performance evaluation.

4 20.1

The Contractor shall respond to all other complaints within 10 working days, including complaints brought to Contractor’s attention by the COR acting as the Quality Assurance Evaluator (QAE).

95%

Direct Observation, Random Sampling

Favorable contractor performance evaluation.

*Note: The definition of failure to complete is the failure to complete the assignment, not the time it takes to complete the assignment.

5. INCENTIVES

The Government shall use recognition in the contractor’s Past Performance Record as incentives.

Incentives shall be based on exceeding, meeting, or not meeting performance standards.

6. 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.

a. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Quality or Attendance Issues must be reported to the COR for action Relies on the VA Attorneys and Paralegals to identify quality issues. Complaints are then investigated and validated.)

7. 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:

Exceeds: 2-5% above acceptable level in table above Meets: Reach acceptable level in table above Does Not Meet: 5% or more below acceptable level in table above

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE

The Government shall document positive 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. 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 receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

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

9. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

a. Frequency of Measurement.

Throughout the contract, the COR will review feedback from requiring VA services on the quality of services provided by the contractor and report such feedback to the Contracting Officer.

b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COR shall meet with the contractor every quarter to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment.

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.

<After award, both the contractor’s Program Manager and the COR shall sign this document.>

Signature – Contractor Program Manager

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative

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 Reports, or letters).

CPAR 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/pdfs/CPARS-Guidance.pdf p. A2-1):

https://www.cpars.gov/pdfs/CPARS-Guidance.pdf

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