Draft_A.01.02_QASP.doc

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

TEAM & ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORATE

SELF-AWARENESS TRAINING, EXECUTIVE COACHING AND SUPPLIES

FOR U.S. ARMY MEDICAL DEPARTMENT

1. INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) entitled Self-Awareness Training, Executive Coaching, and Supplies (SATECS) for U.S. Army Medical Department (AMEDD). This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Team and Organizational Development Directorate (TODD) will use in assessing whether the required performance standards or service levels are achieved by the contractor.

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 in 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 government team. It 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 the TODD to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the PWS outcomes and performance objectives 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 plan (QCP). Quality Control 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 specific performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2. The contracting officer’s representative (COR) will monitor performance and deliverables furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. 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 (KO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control, and resolving any differences between the COR and the contractor.

2.2. The Contracting Officer’s Representative. The COR is designated in writing by the KO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering the 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 KO for action. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract. The number of additional representatives serving as designated inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the KO.

3. IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS. The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included with the PWS as Exhibit A, Performance Requirements Summary.

4. METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1. Surveillance Methods. In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance are:

4.1.1. Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR.

4.1.2. 100% Inspection – Each month, the COR, shall review the generated documentation and enter summary results into the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form (Exhibit B).

4.1.3. Periodic Inspection – The COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

4.2. Customer Complaint. 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 Customer Complaint Investigation, identified in Exhibit C.

4.3. Acceptable Quality Levels. The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) for contractor performance are included in Exhibit A, Performance Requirements Summary, and are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

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 PRS and are assessed using the stated performance monitoring methodologies (see Exhibit A, column 4).

5.2. Monitoring Forms

5.2.1. The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR will be reported using the monitoring form at Exhibit B. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved.

5.2.2. The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6. ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1. Determining Performance. The government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.

6.2. Reporting. At the end of each quarter, the COR or designated inspectors will prepare a written report summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

7. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS). A PRS for these elements is provided in Exhibit A.

EXHIBIT A

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Performance Objective/ Standard

Disincentive

Provide proper certification to 100% of participants upon successful completion of course.

Provide each participant a government-furnished survey and provide 100% of collected responses to the COR NLT seven days after completion of training course.

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one per two training courses.

100% Inspection; Periodic Inspection; and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Trainer support 100% available and accessible to certified trainers during normal operating hours.

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one per month for ongoing trainer support.

100% Inspection; Periodic Inspection; and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

COTS customization 100% complete NLT 45 days following COR final review.

Provide advance notification NLT 45 days to COR of customized COTS updates.

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one prior to COTS customization completion.

100% Inspection and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one.

100% Inspection and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Senior Executive

Self-Awareness Training

Provide each participant a government-furnished survey and provide 100% of collected responses to the COR NLT seven days after completion of training course.

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one per two senior executive training sessions.

100% Inspection and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Senior Executive

Telephonic Executive Coaching

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one per two senior executive telephonic executive coaching sessions.

100% Inspection and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Senior Executive

On-Site Application Consultation

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one per two senior executive on-site application consultation sessions.

100% Inspection and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

Validated customer complaints resulting from contractor action or inaction shall not exceed one per five shipments of training materials.

100% Inspection; Periodic Inspection; and

Validated Customer Complaints Performance above or below the standard will be documented in CPARS.

EXHIBIT B

QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

(Random Sampling (100% Inspection (Periodic Inspection (Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

(Monthly (Quarterly (As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD:

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:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________

DATE: _________________

EXHIBIT C

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION INDIVIDUAL

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY