Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

[contract number] 1 of 6 ED/OPE/PPI

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Requirement Name: Facilitation Services for Negotiated Rulemaking

Contract Number:

Contract Description:

The Office of Policy, Planning, and Innovation (PPI) located in the Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE) in the U.S. Department of Education (Department) is responsible for Title IV student aid policy development, including the development of regulations, which, in most cases, must be developed through a negotiated rulemaking process as provided for by section 492 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (the HEA).

To carry out this responsibility, PPI must make arrangements to provide the resources for a successful negotiated rulemaking process. Specifically, PPI must secure the services of trained facilitators/mediators to provide facilitation services for Title IV student aid policy development.

Contractor’s name: TBD

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.

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

[contract number] 2 of 6 ED/OPE/PPI 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:

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: Amy Wilson, PPI

c. Other Key Government Personnel: Valerie Lefor, Director of Administrative and

Auxiliary Services. PPI

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

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

a. Program Manager:

b. Other Contractor Personnel:

[contract number] 3 of 6 ED/OPE/PPI

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets, or does not meet these standards.

Standards:

Task 1 quality assurance acceptable performance standards:

• 95% of monthly reports submitted on time.

• 95% of monthly reports are accurate.

Task 2 quality assurance acceptable performance standards:

• Facilitators remain neutral and impartial.

• Facilitators have a plan mapped out regarding how they will approach managing meetings.

• Facilitators meet with 100% of negotiators before meeting.

• To the greatest extent possible, facilitators ensure any meeting is efficient and begins and ends on time.

• To the greatest extent possible, facilitators use facilitation techniques to solicit input and engagement from all participants.

• Facilitators manage group dynamics and respond to the needs to the group.

• Facilitators document action items and monitor follow through.

• Facilitators submit a high-level summary after each meeting.

4. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

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

a. INSPECTION. (Can be performed periodically, based on a random or targeted sample, or through 100% inspection.)

i. PERIODIC SAMPLING. (Sample may be targeted or targeted random.

Sample may be taken when a problem/deficiency is suspected. Findings are applicable only for the work inspected. Because sample is not entirely random, it cannot be applied to total activity performance.)

ii. RANDOM SAMPLING. (Designed to evaluate performance by randomly selecting and inspecting a sample of cases. Findings may be deemed applicable to total activity performance, at the government’s discretion.)

iii. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all deliverables.)

b. PROGRESS OR STATUS MEETINGS. COR and contractor PM shall track progress toward completion over time.

[contract number] 4 of 6 ED/OPE/PPI

5. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

a. Frequency of Measurement.

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

b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COR shall meet with the contractor at least once to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment. Further meetings may be required, at the Government’s discretion.

6. 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 CO 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 CO.

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 CO. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

7. PERFORMANCE 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:

Positive Neutral Negative

▪ 0 valid complaints, ▪ Valid complaints ≤ 2, ▪ Valid complaints > 2,

▪ 0 rework required, and ▪ Reworked ≤ 1 deliverable, and ▪ Reworked > 1 deliverable, or

▪ Performed beyond ▪ Met all contract requirements. ▪ Did not satisfy one or more contract requirements. contract requirements.

[contract number] 5 of 6 ED/OPE/PPI

8. SIGNATURES

Signature – Contracting Officer Date

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative Date

Signature – Contractor Program Manager Date

[contract number] 6 of 6 ED/OPE/PPI

QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM

DATE: MONITOR:

ITEM OR SERVICE MONITORED:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Inspection (Check inspection method used)

Periodic Sampling Random Sampling 100% inspection

Customer Complaint

Meeting

FINDINGS:

Satisfied contract? Yes No Complaint valid? Yes No Rework required? Yes No Exceeded contract? Yes No

Description of valid complaint:

Description of rework required:

Description of how exceeded contract:

SIGNATURE: ___________________________________ DATE: _______________