Quality Report

Document No.: BAZ-KSA-QAC-REP-05

Project Title Sample Project

Quality Assurance Executive Summary

Authored by:

Overall Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Schedule Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Budget Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Scope Stability Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Overall Trend Improving/Deteriorating/Static

Overall Score Calculated
Risk Management Carried from worksheet
Project Deliverables Carried from worksheet
Project Management Carried from worksheet
Product Deliverables Carried from worksheet

Reporting Summary (Contractor assessment for the reporting period)

Changes since last report (Contractor assessment for the reporting period)

Current Recommendations (Contractor recommendations for corrective activities or risk considerations)

Status of Prior Recommendations (Contractor recommendations for corrective activities or risk considerations)

Individuals Interviewed/Dates

Documents Reviewed/Dates

Meetings Attended/Dates
 Rev.: 1 Status: IFU

Page: 1 of 6

Project Reporting Date

Executive Summary

(Contractor subjective assessment for the

low/Red reporting period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the
low/Red reporting period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the
low/Red reporting period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the
low/Red reporting period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the
riorating/Static reporting period)
lated 3.1
m worksheet 3.2
m worksheet 3
m worksheet 4.2
m worksheet 2
ities or risk considerations)

ities or risk considerations)

 Quality Report Rev.:

Document No.: BAZ-KSA-QAC-REP-05 Page:

Assessment Area Risk Management - R

A Risk Management assessment by which the Contractor evaluates the effectivene

Description project.

Overall Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Overall Trend Improving/Deteriorating/Static

Overall Score Calculated

Reporting Summary (Contractor assessment for the reporting period)

Recommendations (Contractor recommendations for corrective activities or risk considerations)

Metric Green 5 points Yellow 3 points Red 1

points

R1 - Does a Risk Management Plan exist for the YES In Progress NO

project?
R2- As risks are encountered are they being YES Partially NO
confronted in a timely manner to determine a
proper response strategy?

R3- Is the project experiencing variances from NO Minor YES

schedule baselines? Have significant milestones
been missed? If so how frequently?

R4- Is the project experiencing variances from NO Minor YES

budget baselines? Are significant cost overruns
occurring? Have significant milestones been missed?
If so how frequently?

R5 – Are stakeholders engaged and aligned on YES Partially NO

project roles, authority and outcomes?
R6 – Do business and technology leadership have YES Partially NO
shared expectations for urgency and priority?
R7 – Are there risks with the solution provider’s NO Minor YES
team or approach?
R8- Are the projects human resources appropriately YES In Progress NO
skilled and prepared for the project?

R9 – Are technology risk being addressed and YES Partially NO

planned for?
R10 – Are factors external to the project negatively NO Minor YES
influencing the project team’s ability to succeed?
 1 Status: IFU

1 of 6

R Reporting Date

or evaluates the effectiveness of the risk management strategy and planning for the

(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting

period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting
Static period)
3.2

or risk considerations)

NA 0 Score Trend Reporting Summary

points

1
5

5
 Quality Report Rev.: 1

Document No.: BAZ-KSA-QAC-REP-05 Page:

Assessment Area Project Deliverables - PR

A Verification of Project Deliverables by which the Contractor evaluators if delivera

to the current phase, included but not limited to: Project Management Plan, Chang
Description Project Communications.

Overall Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Overall Trend Improving/Deteriorating/Static

Overall Score Calculated

Reporting Summary (Contractor assessment for the reporting period)

Recommendations (Contractor recommendations for corrective activities or risk considerations)

Metric Green 5 points Yellow 3 points Red 1 NA 0

points points

PR1 – Does the project have a clearly defined YES In Progress NO

business case with clear objectives and criteria for
success and performance metrics?

PR2- Have all business, functional and technical YES In Progress NO

requirements been clearly documented and
prioritized by stakeholders?

PR3- Does the project have a realistic timeline based YES In Progress NO
on a work breakdown structure analysis of required
activities?

PR4 – Does the project have a realistic budget? Are YES Partially NO
adequate financial resources available to accomplish
the projects goals?

PR5 – Does the project plan contain all tasks YES Partially NO
required to successfully deliver the project?
PR6 – Are estimates of schedule and cost realistic YES Partially NO
and include contingency to mitigate disruption?

PR7- Does the project have a formal Change YES In Progress NO

Management Plan? Are changes to scope following
these processes?

PR8 – Are communications on the project happening YES Partially NO

in a timely manner to the right audiences?

PR9 – Is the Project Manager actively managing YES Partially NO

schedule and tasks? Is the project plan up to date
and accurately reflect project scope?

PR10 – Is the Project Manager taking appropriate YES Partially NO

action in response to the occurrence issues and
risks?
 Status: IFU

1 of 6

Reporting Date

or evaluators if deliverables are appropriately scoped and detailed with respective

anagement Plan, Change Management, Project Budget, Project Schedule and

(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting

period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting
period)
3

sk considerations)

Score Trend Reporting Summary

3
3

1
 Quality Report Rev.: 1

Document No.: BAZ-KSA-QAC-REP-05 Page:

Assessment Area Project Management - PM

The Project Management assessment area evaluates the projects organization, rol
ensure the project has engaged all stakeholders at the appropriate level and is pro
Description ownership.

Overall Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Overall Trend Improving/Deteriorating/Static

Overall Score Calculated

Reporting Summary (Contractor assessment for the reporting period)

Recommendations (Contractor recommendations for corrective activities or risk considerations)

Metric Green 5 points Yellow 3 points Red 1 NA 0

points points

PM1 – Does the project have an experienced project YES In Progress NO

manager and executive sponsor assigned to the
project?

PM2-Are all project roles and responsibilities clearly YES Partially NO

defined and assigned?

PM3- Is the City effectively leveraging its contractual YES Partially NO

authority to resolve issues with vendors and
subcontractors?

PM4 – Are the Project Manager, Sponsor and YES Partially NO

Steering Committee heeding project warning signs
and effectively managing risk?

PM5 – Is the project experiencing negative impacts NO Minor YES

due to unresolved issues?
PM6 – Are business units and end users involved and YES Partially NO
participating as stakeholder in the project
outcomes?
PM7 – Is the City properly prepared for the YES Partially NO
organizational and cultural changes that the project
will affect?

PM8 – Has turnover occurred on key roles such as NO Minor YES

the PM, Sponsor, Steering Committee or leads? If
so, are transitions being managed properly?

PM9 – Are accepted industry best practices for YES Partially NO

project management being followed?
PM10 – Does the project team have confidence that YES Partially NO
the project goals are obtainable given the project
scope, budget and timeline?
 Status: IFU

1 of 6

Reporting Date

projects organization, roles and responsibilities and management oversight to

ppropriate level and is provided clear authority, managerial support and business

(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting

period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting
c period)
4.2

risk considerations)

Score Trend Reporting Summary

5
5

5
 Quality Report Rev.:

Document No.: BAZ-KSA-QAC-REP-05 Page:

Assessment Area Product Deliverables - PD

A Verification of Product Deliverables by which the Contractor verifies if product de

Description schedule and cost.

Overall Rating Green/Yellow/Red

Overall Trend Improving/Deteriorating/Static

Overall Score Calculated

Reporting Summary (Contractor assessment for the reporting period)

Recommendations (Contractor recommendations for corrective activities or risk considerations)

Metric Green 5 points Yellow 3 points Red 1

points

PD1 - Does the project have clear criteria for testing YES In Progress NO
and acceptance?
PD2- Is the vendor performing according to contract YES Partially NO
terms? Are they responsive to issues?

PD3 - Are the vendor’s methodologies and work YES Partially NO

processes compatible with the City standards and
best practices?

PD4 - Is the vendor showing discipline and diligence YES Partially NO

to reduce the impacts of change to the project and
agreed upon scopes of work?

PD5 - Are the vendors demonstrating best practice YES Partially NO

quality assurance processes and controls in the
development of deliverables?

PD6 - Are deliverables being provided that meet the YES Partially NO
business need and are fit for use?
PD7 – Are deliverables provided of quality that YES Partially NO
meets or exceeds City requirements?
PD8 - Is proper training, knowledge transfer and YES In Progress NO
documentation accompanying all vendor
deliverables?

PD9 –Is staff turnover occurring on the vendor’s NO Minor YES

project teams? Are contractual processes being
followed for the reassignment of vendor staff to the
project? Is proper knowledge transfer occurring?

PD10 – Does the project manager have confidence YES Partially NO

that the vendor is able and committed to deliver the
project on schedule with required scope?
 1 Status: IFU

1 of 6

D Reporting Date

ctor verifies if product deliverables are of acceptable quality and delivered on agreed upon

(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting

period)
(Contractor subjective assessment for the reporting
tatic period)
2

sk considerations)

NA 0 Score Trend Reporting Summary

points

5
1