deliverable 1.10 - guidelines for quality assurance · based on the best practices deriving from...

Action number: EU-TM-0136-M

Action Title “DP Implementation - Call CEF 2014”

Deliverable 1.10 - Guidelines for Quality Assurance

22nd December 2015 – V1.0

DP IMPLEMENTATION CALL CEF 2014

Del 1.10 Guidelines for Quality Assurance

2

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET

DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION

DOCUMENT TITLE

Deliverable 1.10 – Guidelines for Quality Assurance

REFERENCE NUMBER

ACTIVITY REFERENCE NUMBER:

Activity 1

Version edition:

SUB-ACTIVITY REFERENCE NUMBER:

Not Applicable

V1.0

Executive Summary

Contact Persons:

Paola Di Giovanni

Role:

FPA Coordination Manager

Mail:

[email protected]

Organisation:

SDM

TIMING

Contractual delivery Date:

20/11/2015

Revised/ Actual Date:

22/12/2015

Actual delivery date revised so to ensure the full alignment of the deliverable with the final content of the FPA and SGA signed on the 27th of November 2015.



3

DOCUMENT CHANGE RECORD

The following table records the complete history of the successive editions of the document.

Edition Date Reason for change Sections/Pages

Affected

V1.0 22/12/2015 Final version All

DOCUMENT APPROVAL

The following table identifies authors and contributors of this document.

Organization Authors Contributor/Reviewer APPROVAL date

N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.



4

Table of Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5

1. Quality management framework ....................................................................................................... 7

1.1. Quality planning ................................................................................................................................... 9

1.2. Quality assurance ............................................................................................................................... 12

1.3. Quality control ................................................................................................................................... 13



5

Introduction

This Manual represents the Deliverable 1.10 Guidelines for Quality Assurance, produced according to the Specific Grant Agreement (No. INEA/CEF/TRAN/M2014/1037259) for the funded Action “DP Implementation – Call CEF 2014” N.EU

The current document is issued by SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) to ensure the accomplishment of quality standards during the Action “DP Implementation – Call CEF 2014” execution phase.

According to the activities listed in Article II.1.3 “General obligations and role of the coordinator of the Framework Partnership Agreement with multiple partners” of the SESAR Framework Partnership Agreement, the SDM, acting as Coordinator, envisages a series of tasks on the basis of contributions provided by involved beneficiaries. Indeed, the SDM is in charge of monitoring the execution of the Action to ensure that the Implementation Projects (IPs) are implemented in accordance with the Framework Partnership Agreement and the Specific Grant Agreements.

In this respect, the SDM, acting as Coordinator, will also address a quality management process encompassing three different elements:

1. Quality Planning, aiming at identifying quality requirements of the whole Action with particular regards to methodologies and deliverables;

2. Quality Assurance, aiming at planning procedures oriented to the prevention, detection and reporting of any issue which might impact on Action quality;

3. Quality Control, aiming at verifying the effective implementation of quality procedures. The implementation of the quality management processes will be provided by the PMO in support to AF leaders and IPPs.

Such elements will be addressed throughout the Action with specific reference to the processes which have been already identified within the SDM Guidelines – information package:

- Elaboration and submission of the Action Status Report and Final Report;

- Management of expected payments (pre-financing payments, interim payments and payment of the balance);

- Technical and financial monitoring and reporting processes which are performed to elaborate the DP Execution progress report and the Cost Benefit Analysis.

The present guidelines for quality assurance include the description of the Quality management framework. In particular, it is described the general framework that shall be followed to ensure that all Action results (related to processes adopted during the Action execution and respective outcomes; deliverables, supporting documents and means of verification produced and milestone achieved) are consistently high quality and in compliance with the duly signed agreements.



6

To be noted that this document will be integrated and further detailed within the Action Quality Plan which will provide the guidelines for the effective implementation of the quality management activities set by the SDM. Such plan will be produced by the PMO support, in line with SDM guidelines, in order to facilitate the Implementing Partners, the Action Leader and Activity Leaders in ensuring the accomplishment of defined quality requirements.



7

1. Quality management framework

According to the Agreements provisions, the SDM is to act as the coordinator of the execution of the Action. In this respect, whereas SDM guidelines – information package released on 3rd of December 2015 provides for instructions to support, integrate and coordinate all the activities the Partnership will carry out within the current Action. The present document aims in particular at ensuring:

- the progress of the Action with timing, costs and quality standards expected;

- the perfect alignment of the activities envisaged within the Action with the scope and objectives pursued by PCP.

Based on the best practices deriving from PMI (Project Management Institute), the SDM identified the Quality Management framework illustrated in the following picture. Such framework aims at ensuring the proper alignment of the Action results1 with expected standards of quality, throughout the execution of the current Action.

Figure 1 – Quality management framework

1 It has to be noted that the term “Action results” comprehends more in general: processes adopted

during the Action execution and respective outcomes; deliverables, supporting documents and means of verification produced and milestone achieved.

Definition of requirements for quality

Quality assessment and identification of non conformity

Identification of preventive

/corrective actions

Planning

AssuranceControl



8

The accomplishment of defined results of the current Action “DP Implementation – Call CEF 2014” with timing, cost and quality standards expected shall be ensured through three steps:

1. Planning: definition of requirements for quality

The step 1. refers to the identification of the proper contents of the Action quality plan and the timing of its production. Moreover, the quality requirements are defined to achieve the expected coherence of the Action results with the standards, in terms of processes performed, their outcomes, deliverables, means of verification and supporting documents produced and milestones achieved.

2. Assurance: quality assessment and identification of non conformity

The step 2. refers to the process of assessing the quality requirements to ensure that appropriate quality standards have been met. Potential non conformities are detected and analysed.

3. Control: identification of preventive/corrective actions

The step 3. refers to the process of monitoring and recording results of audits and controls which have been performed. The timely identification of preventive/corrective actions and necessary changes is essential to ensure the continuous improving of both Action performance and established quality requirements.

Through the proposed 3-steps methodology, the effective management of the SDM processes quality will be ensured, thus enabling the supervision of information, data and documents provided from beneficiaries. The implementation of necessary measures to address potential quality issues will be performed to accomplish with shared quality requirements.

Further details about the above mentioned steps are provided in the following sections.



9

1.1. Quality planning

Action quality plan

The information to be included within the Action quality plan will refer to:

- overall timescale of quality management processes;

- criteria and methods to assess quality requirements;

- areas of application of audits and quality controls;

- preventive and corrective measures to address potential quality issues.

According to the SGA Annex I, the Action quality plan will be realised by the PMO support at the beginning of Action and will cover it entirely.

The Action quality plan shall include necessary information to effectively manage Action quality results for processes already identified within the SDM guidelines – information package. Such processes are related to:

- ASR and Final Report elaboration and submission;

- Action payments management;

- Technical and financial monitoring and reporting activities through the elaboration of the DP execution progress report and the Cost and Benefit Analysis.

In particular, on the basis of the SDM guidelines for quality assurance, the content of the Action quality plan will refer to Action processes already identified in order to further describe “how” expected quality requirements should be achieved during the current funded Action for:

- Tasks, deliverables and milestones accomplishment;

- Deliverables, means of verification and supporting documents production and their respective review/validation procedures;

- Storage of all documents and data according to the provisions of the agreements;

- Implementation of quality checks.

Quality requirements

The Action results will be evaluated in consideration to their pertinence to and fulfilment of the following requirements which represent the necessary “quality attributes” to ensure the achievement of the Action objectives:

1. Consistency regards terminology used, definitions and logical coherence;



10

2. Presentation concerns the standardised form, the structure and clarity of the

documentation;

3. Conformity aims at verify compliance with activities scope, owner and relevant

review and approval procedures;

4. Conformity regards the alignment with Action scope and general requirements

of the Agreements;

5. Completeness regards the results requested as compared with its requirements;

6. Compliance refers to the accomplishment with timing and planned delivery

dates.

The following table aims at providing an overall reference to assess the alignment of

Action processes outcomes, deliverables, supporting documents, means of verification

and milestones with defined quality requirements. Such requirements are applicable to

technical, financial and administrative quality items.



11

Quality requirements

Consistency

processes outcomes consistent to the scope and objectives of the

whole Action;

more specifically, processes outcomes coherent to the objectives

of the Activity they belong to, and where applicable to the ATM

Functionalities they contribute to;

deliverables using an appropriate terminology;

deliverables adequate to the layer of the Action they refer to.

Presentation

adherence to the templates provided for deliverables

/milestones submission;

adherence to the templates provided by the SDM for deliverables

/milestones/tasks achievement;

precise and concise executive summary of each deliverable;

correct language used for deliverables and supporting documents

editing.

Conformity

processes in line with expected owner, review and approval

procedures;

processes in agreement to the monitoring and reporting activities

set by the SDM;

deliverables compliant with the defined scope and owners;

agreed methodologies have been correctly implemented in the

production of each deliverable.

Conformity (with

legal framework)

processes outcomes coherence to the Agreements provisions;

the ownership of Action processes in line with Agreements;

deliverables and means of verification in line with those outlined

within the SGA Annex I;

Delivery timing coherence to the Agreements provisions.

Completeness

history and track changes outlined for modifications/change

requests;

specification of different authors/contributors for data and

information provided;

provision of required supporting documents.

Compliance

processes completed in compliance with Action timeline;

deliverables completed at the contractual delivery date

established in the SGA Annex I and in line with Agreements

provisions;

requested data/information/supporting documents ready at each

reporting gates;

timely provision of cause of any deviation from contractual side.



12

1.2. Quality assurance

Quality assessment

The proper identification of possible quality issues, incoherencies and information gaps is essential to timely detect any non conformity and facilitate the improvement of the quality management system.

Planned and systematic activities for evaluating quality requirements and ensuring that they are in compliance with signed Agreements and guidelines issued by the SDM, have to be undertaken throughout the Action. Specifically, the assessment activities will be undertaken in:

- correspondence of the established monitoring gates;

- correspondence of expected dates for the accomplishment of tasks, deliverables and milestones;

- throughout the Action, considering a continuous quality assessment process.

In respect of this, relevant contractual outcomes will be assessed from technical, financial and administrative perspectives. Indeed, such activities will concern in general:

- accomplishment of contractual tasks / deliverables / milestones;

- provision of requested data, information, means of verification and supporting documents;

- fulfilment of mandatory SGA and FPA obligations and established Action guidelines;

- achievement of expected Action objectives.

By comparing their current state with the relevant desired states, the quality assessment results may be:

- “verified”;

- “out of compliance”.

Depending on the adherence to quality standards. Quality items that is characterised with “out of compliance” are considered as non conformity.

The quality assessment activities aim at identifying issues, related to the quality of Action results out of compliance with the specified six above mentioned quality requirements, in order to address them before the Action closure through the proper preventive/ corrective actions. Further details concerning the methods through which the quality requirements will be assessed during the execution of the current Action and relevant area of application (e.g. supporting documents produced by each IP, data uploaded within the STAR tool to produce the ASR, etc.) will be provided in the Action quality plan.



13

Non conformity detection

On the basis of the quality assessment results, potential non conformity are detected and analysed to identify the proper preventive/corrective actions.

Any incomplete, inconsistent Action result, which is characterised as “out of compliance”, will be further investigated and amended or reworked, if needed, to ensure its full alignment with expected requirements.

The following non conformity status may occur:

- “Amended”;

- “Accepted without corrections”;

- “Rejected”.

Corrections and non-conformances which have been accepted, will be recorded to keep track of their current status. Corrected and reworked documents will be re-inspected to make sure they meet the quality requirements.

All the non-conformances tracked and recorded during the execution of the Action will be reviewed to finalize the “lesson learned” which contribute to the continuous improvement of the quality management process.

Evaluation will be performed to determinate the effects of identified non conformities to the overall objective of the relevant Activity and to what extent reworking or complete rejection may be necessary.

The investigation of the cause for non-compliance with requirements is important in order to avoid recurrence. In this respect, the responsible for the detected issue must be identified, in order to ensure its effective and prompt resolution as well as its avoidance in the future.

Further details concerning the methods through which the non conformities will be detected during the execution of the current Action and relevant area of application (e.g. supporting documents produced by each IP, data uploaded within the STAR tool to produce the ASR, etc.) will be provided in the Action quality plan.

1.3. Quality control

Audits management

Planned periodical quality audits and quality checks will be executed throughout the Action in order to assess the implementation and effectiveness of the SDM established quality requirements.

In particular, according to the monitoring gates identified within the SDM guidelines – information package, the quality checks will be performed every year in correspondence to the:



14

- I monitoring gate: 15th of January;

- II monitoring gate: 15th of April;

- III monitoring gate: 15th of September.

Moreover, quality checks will be performed in correspondence to the expected delivery dates outlined within the SGA Annex I and duly signed agreements for the:

- achievement of a milestone;

- completion of a task;

- submission of a deliverable;

- provision of supporting documents.

Such activities are performed to ensure that relevant contractual data and documentation have been timely uploaded on the STAR tool by involved beneficiaries taking into account SDM guidelines.

Finally, a continuous quality assessment process is performed following the activities outlined and further detailed within the PMO manual, which have been identified according to the SDM guidelines.

On the basis of the specific deliverable / means of verification / supporting document to be provided to accomplish with mandatory requirements for each Action process, the most suitable methods to monitor and measure their quality are adopted. As a consequence, the appropriate preventive or corrective actions will be identified and performed if expected results have not met. Any potential quality issues are detected and recorded during the execution of quality checks.

Further details concerning the methods through which the quality checks will be performed during the execution of the current Action and relevant area of application (e.g. supporting documents produced by each IP, data uploaded within the STAR tool to produce the ASR, etc.) will be provided in the Action quality plan.

Documents and data control

All beneficiaries are responsible for providing all necessary contributions to produce the Action deliverables / means of verification and supporting documents. Any requested templates, format, supporting documents, declarations, certificate, financial statement have to be provided to ensure consistency and full alignment with Agreement provisions.

According to SDM guidelines, PMO manual and STAR tool manual, beneficiaries will upload contractual documentations, deliverables, means of verification and supporting documents within the STAR tool, thus enabling data track and quality control process. All contractual documents must be provided in electronic version and should arrive no later than close of business on the day of the due date.



15

In case of any deviation from expected delivery date the beneficiaries have to provide a notification which explains the reason and the rescheduled date of delivery.

Any requested document should be in English and contain the reference to:

- Action number and title;

- SGA number;

- Implementation Project name to which is referred to;

- ATM functionality to which is referred to;

- Action Activity and sub-activity ID to which is referred to;

- SESAR Deployment Manager logo;

- date and version.

All documents provided have to be achieved to take track of their latest version. The adequacy of the documents and data will be reviewed to avoid that invalid and/or obsolete documents are considered and not secured against unintended use.

Further details concerning ad hoc rules for the provisioning of proper template and file naming of supporting documents, deliverables, milestones and means of verification will be provided in the Action quality plan thus ensuring that all needed information are communicated to facilitate data and document control.

Preventive/Corrective action identification

Once a non conformity has been identified the most suitable preventive and/or corrective action is defined in order to delete its cause and ensure the full alignment with expected quality requirements.

The owner of the process outcomes / deliverables / milestones/ means of verification/ supporting documents for which a non conformity has been identified is involved in the problem resolution. The shared solution is applied to accomplish with expected results.

Any missing data / information / signature / notifications have to be provided and communicated to involved parties.

All the preventive/corrective actions performed during the execution of the Action will be tracked and recorded to contribute to the continuous improvement of the quality management process.

Further details concerning the preventive/corrective actions which will be undertaken during the execution of the current Action and relevant area of application (e.g. supporting documents produced by each IP, data uploaded within the STAR tool to produce the ASR, etc.) will be provided in the Action quality plan.