TRC Quality - TRD QMP

• Document No.

• Audit Title

• Client / Site

• Conducted on

  Date

• Prepared by

• Location
  Address

• Personnel

• Business Confidential -- For Internal Use Only

GENERAL AUDIT INFORMATION

• Project(s) Reviewed, Project Number and Name:

• Audited Organization/Project Representative:

• Purpose and Objective: To evaluate the implementation of the TRD Quality Management Plan (QMP) and to identify opportunities to improve the quality systems and procedures.

• Scope: This audit reviewed the project(s) referenced above to evaluate conformance to the applicable procedures in the TRD QMP and to evaluate the effectiveness of quality procedures used on the project.

• Describe the activities, processes, and/or aspects of the project(s) reviewed.

• List any aspects of the project(s) excluded from the audit.

• Date of Opening Meeting:

  Date

• Date of Exit Meeting:

  Date

TRD QMP COMPLIANCE - Do projects adopt applicable quality procedures in the QMP?

• Use the questions below to guide your review of objective evidence to evaluate whether the project conforms to the applicable quality procedures and/or requirements in the TRD QMP. How effective are the project procedures with controlling quality of the project?

1. Project Set-Up and Launch

• 1.1 Do project team members have the skill sets or qualifications needed for their assignments? How were they selected?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.5 & 5.3 Examples for Evidence: experience matrix, organization chart, resumes, other documentation of qualifications Notes/Comments:

• 1.2 Were project instructions, or equivalent (e.g., scope of work, QA/QC procedures, templates, schedule, budget, assignments), distributed to the project team?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.4 Examples for Evidence: project instructions, other documentation (memo, email, proposal) with the information Notes/Comments:

• 1.3 Did the Project Manager confirm that team members understand specifically what they are expected to do?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.6 & 5.9 Examples for Evidence: email communication with project team, meeting minutes or agenda, statements from project team Notes/Comments:

2. Requirements and Risk Management

• 2.1 Does the project have a process to communicate applicable requirements to the project team and confirm conformance?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 3.1 & 3.2 Examples for Evidence: project records listing project-specific quality-related requirements, in a location accessible to the project teams Notes/Comments:

3. Work Procedures and Quality Control

• 3.1 Are computations, drawings, reports, letters, or other project deliverables prepared in a clear, logical, neat, accurate, complete, and precise manner?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.9 Examples for Evidence: project work products, in-progress drafts and/or client deliverables Notes/Comments:

4. Engineering Design Reviews and Controls

• 4.1 Does the project have written, client approved, design criteria?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.11.2 Examples for Evidence: approved design criteria in project files Notes/Comments:

• 4.2 Are designs backed up with complete, legible, and logically arranged engineering calculations?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.11.2 Examples for Evidence: calculations in project file Notes/Comments:

• 4.3 Were required design changes communicated to the design team? How?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.11.3 Examples for Evidence: records showing design change communication to team Notes/Comments:

• 4.4 Were reviews (checks) performed to determine whether completed designs are constructible, functional, and meet the client's requirements and conform to established regulatory requirements?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.11.4 Examples for Evidence: markups of the item showing review comments and resolution Notes/Comments:

5. Peer Review

• 5.1.a Was the proposal (e.g., cost estimate, scope of work proposal) reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• 5.1.b Were conceptual design phase (e.g., 30%) work products reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• 5.1.c Were design phase (e.g., 60%, 90%) work products reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• 5.1.d Was the final design package (e.g., 100%), or equivalent, reviewed prior to delivery to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.4, 5.2, & 5.2.4 Examples for Evidence: project records showing peer review prior to delivery Notes/Comments:

• 5.2 Are the Peer Reviewer(s) independent of the work activity or work product(s) reviewed?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.2.2 Examples for Evidence: peer review records, compare who produced the work product with who reviewed Notes/Comments:

• 5.3 Do Peer Reviewers have qualifications / skill sets needed to understand the material reviewed? How were they selected?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.2.2 Examples for Evidence: Peer Reviewer qualifications (e.g., resume, examples of prior experience) Notes/Comments:

• 5.4 Was sufficient time and budget allotted for peer review? For an adequately comprehensive review? To address review comments?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.4 Examples for Evidence: project schedule allocating time for peer reviews and responding to comments, records showing how comments were addressed Notes/Comments:

6. Procurement and Subcontractor/Subconsultant Management

• 6.1 Was procurement documentation consistent with TRC Purchase Order and Procurement Procedure requirements on TRCNet? - Example: POs processed in Vision (materials & subcontractors >$1,000) prior to invoice receipt. - Example: Required approvals included.

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.4 Examples for Evidence: PO records (materials & subcontractors) in Vision/Sceris prior to invoice receipt Notes/Comments:

• 6.2 Were subcontractors/subconsultants selected based on their ability to perform he services required? - technical/engineering expertise - safety record and procedures - quality standards and procedures - financial standards

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.4 Examples for Evidence: records showing review of subconsultant/subcontractor qualifications and/or basis in selection process Notes/Comments:

• 6.3 Did the Project Manager (or designee) monitor quality of subcontractor services to confirm completion of established scope of service? How?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.4 & 5.4 Examples for Evidence: project records (e.g, deliverables status list, meeting minutes) showing review of subcontractor services Notes/Comments:

7. Project Deliverables

• 7.1 Did the Project Manager review all final deliverables and/or confirm that an appropriate review was performed prior to delivery?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.1.4 Examples for Evidence: project review records Notes/Comments:

• 7.2 Are dates printed on the work products (e.g., drawings, documents) transmitted to the client?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.5.1 Examples for Evidence: project records - file copies of project documents, drawings, etc. delivered to the client Notes/Comments:

• 7.3 Is a copy of each client deliverable in the project file (digital and/or hard copy)?

  Select 1 - No Evidence of Conformance 2 - Minimal Conformance 3 - Moderate Conformance 4 - Some Conformance 5 - Full Conformance Not Applicable

  • 1 - No Evidence of Conformance
  • 2 - Minimal Conformance
  • 3 - Moderate Conformance
  • 4 - Some Conformance
  • 5 - Full Conformance
  • Not Applicable

• QMP 5.13 Examples of Evidence: work products / deliverables in project files Notes/Comments:

• Additional Comments or Notes

• Business Confidential -- For Internal Use Only

QUALITY CULTURE - What motivates quality-influencing behavior within TRC?

• Use a few of the questions below to guide interviews with project personnel. Listen for indications of potential quality issues, improvement opportunities, and strengths or weaknesses in TRC's quality culture.

• General Questions for Anyone on the Project

• Briefly describe the project and your role.

• What were/are the top quality issues on this project?

• What recommendations for improvement do you have?

• Describe a best practice others could learn from, or a success story from this project.

• Questions for Project Managers

• How do you identify and manage risk specific to this, or any, project?

• How do you capture requirements and communicate them with your project team?

• How do you handle inter-discipline handoffs on the project?

• When changes occur (e.g., design change, change in scope of work), how do you communicate them to your project team?

• Do the people on your project team have the right experience and/or skill sets?

• How and when do you select Peer Reviewers?

• In hindsight, would you propose on the project differently? (e.g., revise work plan, schedule, budget)

• Any issues with invoicing?

• Questions for Project Team Members

• How do you know:
  - What your project assignment(s) are?
  - Your roles on the project?
  - What is expected from you?

• How are your budget and schedule communicated to you?

• Describe the QC checking process on this project, or other quality procedures used.

• Are the QC checking procedures sufficient? Why or Why Not?

• Where do you run into quality impacting issues?

• Questions for Peer Reviewers

• How did you know you were the Peer Reviewer for this project?

• Describe how the project requirements and objectives were communicated to you.

• Has anything limited you from providing substantive reviews? (e.g., schedule, budget, skills or experience)

• How do you communicate your peer review comments to the project team?

• Were your review comments resolved to your satisfaction?

• Have you had any quality-impacting challenges on this project within the role of peer reviewer?

• Additional and/or General Comments or Notes

Positive Observations, Strengths, and/or Best Practices

Non-Conformance Reports and/or Opportunities for Improvement

• Non-Conformance Report (NCR)

NCR

• Describe the activity not meeting applicable requirements and/or the observed quality failure. Include a reference to the QMP Section or source and the requirement not met.

• Grades of NCRs<br> Major - systematic breakdown / requires corrective action <br> Minor - violation of QMP or standard / requires corrective action <br> Observation - warrants management attention

  Major

  Minor

  Observation

• Opportunities for Improvement

Opportunities

• Describe your findings or observations of the potential quality-impacting issue and/or area for improvement.

Audit Conclusions

• Report Distribution:

  Select Project Manager Practice Leader Sector Director National Quality Director

  • Project Manager
  • Practice Leader
  • Sector Director
  • National Quality Director

• Lead Auditor Signature

  Sign

• Select date

  Date