20.4.1 A key issue is who will do the monitoring - the Authority, the Contractor, a partnership between the two or a third party.
20.4.2 Monitoring should occur at three levels:
• a systematic monitoring by the Contractor through a quality management system measuring availability and performance (see Section 7.5 (Quality Management Systems));
• a review of the quality management system of the Contractor by the Authority with certain planned and random spot checks (with an ability to increase monitoring on repeated failure or poor performance) (see Section 19.6.3 (Consequences of Poor Performance)); and
• the ability for users to report failures (e.g. doctors, teachers and service personnel).
A failure to agree such a system can cause difficulties, particularly if disputes arise on the issue of whether a payment is due.
20.4.3 Monitoring requires the use of information that can only be gathered with co-operation from the Contractor. Mechanisms must be in place to ensure the Contractor provides data accurately.7 The right approach depends on the particular Project but will always call for co-operation between the parties as benefits will accrue to the Contractor as well as the Authority. Where a Contractor is providing the information, the Authority should obtain a right of audit to verify the information.
20.4.4 The Authority must ensure that sufficient resources and people with the right level of experience are available to manage and monitor the Contract. Some projects arrange for joint training and development of Authority and Contractor staff to encourage partnership.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7 Failure to provide data should give rise to deductions and/or the award of performance points under the performance regime.