Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Valet Parking Services, James A Haley VA Medical Center, Tampa Florida, VISN 8 / RPO EAST

Issued 06/01/2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

2.3 Customer Feedback

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES OF QA SURVEILLANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

4.2 Acceptable Performance Levels

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

5.2 Monitoring Forms

5.3 Reviews and Resolution

5.4 Frequency of Measurement

ATTACHMENT 1 CONTRACT PERFORMANE REPORT…………………………………..…………….…...8

ATTACHMENT 2 CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)………………..…………………………...9

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS). This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines James A Haley VA Medical Center, Tampa Florida, VISN 8 / RPO EAST will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

The Contractor will park and/or provide assistance parking approximately 400 cars per day. The Contractor shall provide all labor, material, supervision, equipment, supplies, and services required to provide valet parking and traffic control for VA patients, visitors, and volunteers. Services shall include valet ticketing; securing keys; and parking, delivering, and directing certain vehicles to and from the valet greeting area located at the hospital's designated locations. Parking areas shall include lots at the hospital the Poly- Trauma/Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) entrance; the James A. Haley Freedom Lot; the Primary Care Clinic Annex, which is located within 5 miles of the main hospital.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by Police Department Office and NCO 8 to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time COR as the government authority for performance management.

Assigned CO: Cynthia Gregg, Contracting Officer

Department of Veterans Affairs VISN 8 Network Contract Office (NCO) 8875 Hidden River Parkway Tampa, FL 33637

Other Key Government Personnel: Christina Blevins

Contract Specialist Department of Veterans Affairs James A. Haley VA Hospital 13000 Bruce B. Downs Blvd Tampa, FL 33612

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The contracting officer representative (COR) is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for administration of the project and ensures 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 CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract.

Assigned COR: Sandra Hinsz

Administrative Officer, VA Police Service

Department of Veterans Affairs James A. Haley VA Hospital 13000 Bruce B. Downs Blvd Tampa, FL 33612

Program Manager: Paul Fleming

VA Police Service 813-903-4898

Paul.Fleming2@va.gov

2.3 Customer Feedback

The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the CO and the COR, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint Investigation, identified in Attachment 3.

Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the PWS and in Attachment 1, “Performance Requirements Summary.” If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract. Failure to meet the required service or performance level will result in a deduction from the monthly amount.

The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix below includes performance standards required to be met by the contractor. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

mailto:Paul.Fleming2@va.gov

Performance Indicators

PWS Ref Performance Measure

Acceptable Level of Quality

Method of Assessment

Incentive

Dis-incentive

The Contractor shall meet the Performance Standard of

PWS

Timeliness

5, 6,8, 13, 14,15,16, 19, 20 and 23

Lot parking timeframes;

wait times for parking;

contractor employee orientation and training;

30 day background security requirements

90% accuracy for 10-minute wait times; no more than 2 customer complaints per contractor employee per month; 100% for all other timelines

Reports, Visual Observation, Claims, customer complaints, random monitoring

Favorable contractor performance evaluations

Unfavorable contractor performance evaluation and/or 2%, 3%, 4% and 5% progressive deduction penalty from invoice payments for excessive customer complaints and security violations

The Contractor shall meet the

Policy Requirements of PWS Courtesy to veterans

15 Contractor shall meet the requirements during the period of performance

No more than 2 customer complaints per contractor employee per month

Reports, Visual Observation, Claims, customer complaints, random monitoring, COR or

CO direct observation

Favorable contractor performance evaluations

Unfavorable contractor performance evaluation and/or 2%, 3%, 4% and 5% progressive deduction penalty from invoice payments for excessive customer complaints The Contractor shall meet the

Claims and Damages

Requirements of PWS

Damage to vehicles

20 Contractor shall meet the requirements during the period of performance

100% compliance

Reports, Visual Observation, Claims, customer complaints, random monitoring, COR or

CO direct observation

Favorable contractor performance evaluations

Unfavorable contractor performance evaluation

Provide 6 Contractor shall meet the requirements during the period of performance

100% Reports, Visual Observation, Claims, customer complaints, random monitoring, COR feedback with supporting written documentation

Favorable contractor performance evaluations

Unfavorable contractor performance evaluation

Contractor Staff are on time and meets workplace requirements

5, 6, 8, 9 11,12,16 17,18,19, 22 and 24

Work hours as detailed in the PWS and all other referenced requirements during the period of performance

100% Reports, Visual Observation, Claims, customer complaints, random monitoring, COR/CO feedback with supporting written documentation

Favorable contractor performance evaluations

Unfavorable contractor performance evaluation

Address and correct employee conduct and/or performance discrepancies

6, 8,11,12, 13,14,15, 16, and 18

1 business day from VA notification

100% Reports, Visual Observation, Claims, customer complaints, random monitoring, COR/CO feedback with supporting written documentation

Favorable contractor performance evaluations

Unfavorable contractor performance evaluation

4 METHODOLOGIES OF QA SURVEILLANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

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

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. (Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance).

• Contractor POC Monthly report

• Daily Activity reports; verbal and written (verbal shall be documented for file)

• Customer/Chief of Police/Director/Contracting Officer concerns and complaints

• Contractor/Contract periodic and Quality Audits

• Compliance Audits

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. (Evaluates outcomes on a periodic basis) Inspections may be scheduled as required.

c. USER SURVEY. VA Police and Contractor reports

d. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. All complaints relative to contractor work/performance and/or conduct shall be reported and addressed by the contractor.

e. PROGRESS OR STATUS MEETINGS. Monthly meetings with contractor supervisor as needed to review performance, work related issues and review progress. Monthly written reports, as required by PWS, will be submitted/reviewed.

f. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all outcomes.)

g. PERIODIC SAMPLING. (Variation of random sampling. However, sample is only taken when a problem/deficiency is suspected. Sample results are applicable only for the specific work inspected.

Since sample is not entirely random, it cannot be applied to total activity performance.)

h. RANDOM SAMPLING. (Designed to evaluate performance by randomly selecting and inspecting a sample of complaints and/or contractor employee discrepancies.

i. ANALYSIS OF CONTRACTOR'S PROGRESS. (Evaluate cost, schedule, etc.)

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:

EXCEPTIONAL: Performance significantly exceeds contract requirements to the Government’s benefit.

SATISFACTORY: Performance meets contractual requirements.

UNSATISFACTORY: Performance does not meet contractual requirements.

4.2 Acceptable Performance Levels

The Government (COR and CO) 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.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes.

Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR or CO, will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments 1 and 2. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results service and quality levels are being achieved.

5.2.1 The COR and CO will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

5.3 Reviews and Resolution

5.3.1 The COR may require the contractor, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO, COR or PM and other government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Issues and concerns of both parties

Corrective action plan analysis

Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

5.4 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 monthly to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment.

Signature – Contractor Program Manager

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative

Attachments:

1. Contract Performance Report

2. Contract Discrepancy Report

Attachment 1 Contract Performance Report

Contract Number:

1. Prepared by: (Name of COR)

2. Date and time of observation:

3. Observation see note below:

Examples of items to include in a report are:

• Method of surveillance.

• How frequently you conducted surveillance.

• Surveillance results.

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative Date:

Attachment 2 Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR)

TO: (Contractor Program Manager or onsite representative)

FROM: (Name of COR)

1. Contract Number:

2. Date and time observed discrepancy:

3. Discrepancy/Problem/Issue:

Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.

4. Corrective action plan:

5. A written corrective action plan (is/is not) required. (If a written corrective action plan is required include the following.) the written Corrective Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than (# days after receipt of this CDR.)

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative

Received by:

Signature – Contracting Program Manager or Onsite Representative

Distribution:

Contracting Officer

5.4 Frequency of Measurement

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative