Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) : Meta-Xceed, Inc. September 17, 2002
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) : Meta-Xceed, Inc. September 17, 2002
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) : Meta-Xceed, Inc. September 17, 2002
Meta-Xceed, Inc.
September 17, 2002
Table of Contents
1.1. Purpose 1
1.2. Definitions 1
1.3. Procedure 1
2.1. Purpose 2
2.2. Scope 3
2.3. Policy 3
2.4. Validation Principles 3
2.5. Responsibilities 4
2.6. Documentation 4
2.7. System-Specific Validation Documents 4
Development Documentation 4
2.8. 4
2.9. Procedure 5
3.1. Purpose 5
3.2. Scope 5
3.3. Participants 6
3.4. Initiating a Change Control (CR) 6
3.5. Approval 7
3.6. Implementation 7
4.1. Purpose 8
4.2. Definitions 8
4.3. Tasks 8
4.4. SDLC Stages 9
5.1. Purpose 12
5.2. Scope 12
5.3. Procedure 12
6. Training Methods 14
6.1. Purpose 14
6.2. Policy 14
6.3. Procedures 14
7.1. Scope/Goals 15
7.2. Definitions 15
7.3. Process 15
8.1. Scope 17
8.2. Definitions 17
8.3. Procedures 17
9.1. Purpose 19
9.2. Process 19
1. Amendment History
2.1. Purpose
This SOP describes the method for identifying, resolving, and documenting deviations
encountered during validation testing of computer-related systems.
2.2. Definitions
Test: The pre-approved documentation where testing instructions are defined and
results are recorded.
Tester: Any person involved in executing tests. The tester executes tests and identifies
deviations, documents deviation(s), and performs corrective actions where appropriate.
Deviation: A deviation occurs when actual test results do not match expected results,
the test cannot be completed as written, the system does not perform as specified by
the test, or any other unexpected condition arises.
2.3. Procedure
The following procedure should be followed when a deviation occurs.
2.3.1. Identify Deviation
Document the observed deviation at the time it is encountered, including
signature of observer and date. Describe exactly what was observed to
warrant a deviation. Assign a unique identifier to the deviation. If a single
deviation affects a number of tests, a global deviation may be used to
cover all affected tests.
Document the root cause of the deviation (e.g., test generation error,
hardware/software bug, specification is incorrect, etc).
2.3.5. Documentation
At a minimum, the following information should be documented:
System name and test ID
Unique identifier for the deviation (e.g., test IW-1)
Description of deviation, signed and dated by the observer
Explanation and root cause for deviation
Description of corrective action, impact assessment (on other tests,
requirements, specifications, software, etc). For hardware or software
change, reference the change record number.
3.1. Purpose
Meta-Xceed recognizes that data is a valuable asset and that product cannot be
released to market without data of ensured integrity. This policy defines Meta-Xceed's
commitment to the validation of computer systems and provides guidance on the
principles for carrying out computer validation in accordance with the requirements of
the FDA and other regulatory agencies.
3.2. Scope
This policy is applicable to all existing and new computer systems used for GXP
purposes, and regulatory submissions. A computer system consists of computer
hardware, software, operating environment, associated data, and documentation to
perform a GXP or regulatory submission function.
3.3. Policy
Computer systems that manage data, support regulatory submissions, or control
manufacturing operations that affect the safety, efficacy, or quality of our products must
be validated. Validation of these systems must demonstrate that they were properly
developed, have been thoroughly tested, and are being maintained in a manner that
ensures they meet user requirements, are reliable, and are protected from unintended
changes.
The validation of new computer systems must be performed using pre approved
prospective protocols. Validation documentation must be compiled into approved
summaries and maintained on file in a location where it can be retrieved for inspection
by regulatory authorities. It is important that validation summaries be complete and
stand alone packages that can be understood by qualified independent reviewers
without reliance upon specific individuals for interpretation.
3.5. Responsibilities
The management of areas with computer systems that fall within the scope of this
policy is responsible for ensuring the systems are validated in compliance with this
policy. Validation of computer systems is typically achieved using a team approach with
defined roles: Owners, Users, Developers, Quality Assurance Unit, and any necessary
support groups.
System Owners: manage the operation of systems. They identify the need for new
computer systems and are responsible for their development, validation, maintenance,
and support. They are responsible for maintaining an inventory of validated computer
systems for their area. System Owners may delegate the execution of these activities.
System Users: use the systems on a day to day basis. They provide the basis for the
functional design and support the testing and documentation effort for validation.
3.6. Documentation
Documentation potentially required for validated computer systems falls into three
broad categories: system specific validation documents, development documentation,
and procedures. At a minimum, the validation of a computer system requires a
Validation Protocol (or Project Plan when a project involves multiple systems), which
identifies the validation testing and documentation required, and a Validation Summary
of the validation results.
3.9. Procedure
4.1. Purpose
To describe the procedures for users of Meta-Xceed computer systems to accomplish
change to their systems, under appropriate control.
4.2. Scope
4.3. Participants
Project Manager: The Project Manager is the senior technical person accountable for
a Meta-Xceed developed or supported application. The Project Manager is responsible
for:
Project Sponsor: The Project Sponsor is the product user community's representative
for change control and will be the designated system/data owner. The Project Sponsor
is responsible for:
The Change Request form (CR) is the mechanism by which significant enhancements,
updates and new product implementations are requested and malfunctions are
reported. For smaller enhancements and bug fixes, the online Change Control Note
(CCNote) can be used to report the items more efficiently.
Any user or developer may generate a request. The CR form and CCNote can be
access on Meta-Xceed servers. For the CR number will only be assign after all the
initiating sections have been completed. The CCNote will have an identification
number automatically assigned to it upon request.
The Project Manager determines whether the impact of the requested change is major
or minor. If it is major, an Impact Analysis is performed.
The Impact Analysis identifies how changes to the software might impact critical
business functions or validation status of systems and/or result in the loss or
interruption of operations.
4.5. Approval
A CR is required for all proposed changes. Documentation for minor changes will follow
the System Development Life Cycle. Documentation for major changes is defined by
the Project Manager. The validation documentation necessary for a proposed change
is dependent upon the size, complexity and impact of the system and the criticality of
the data or processes the system manages.
4.6. Implementation
The project manager completes the Implementation Plan (part of the CR form),
identifying critical milestones such as completion of validation documents before going
into production, pre requisite activities, work to be performed by other groups, etc.
Once the change is coded, tested, and documented per SDLC procedures or
deliverables stated in the MCR, the changed is implemented. The Project Manager
notifies impacted groups that the change has taken place.
The original CR is retained in the active file until final disposition. Upon final disposition,
the original CR will be filed and retained as a system development life cycle document.
4.7. Purpose
This procedure describes the methodology that Meta-Xceed uses to develop validated
information systems. Meta-Xceed System Development Life Cycle is available as a
document on the Meta-Xceed servers.
4.8. Definitions
System Testing: Testing conducted on a complete, integrated system to evaluate the
system's compliance with its functional specifications.
Validation: The process of evaluating system during or at the end of the development
process to determine whether it satisfies specified requirements.
Project Plan: Lists outlining tasks, deliverables, resources, and timelines for a project.
4.9. Tasks
Development
Identify the need for new computerized systems.
Provide user requirements which are the basis for the functional design.
Participate in user acceptance testing.
Accept the system for release into production.
Approve the project scope and approach from the technical feasibility point of
view, adherence to standards, and appropriateness to the overall IT strategy
and architecture.
Define system design, development, and implementation plans and schedules.
Review system integration issues with other initiatives.
Review technical conversion from current to new systems within implementation
plans.
Manage system and user acceptance testing.
Stage Completion
Each stage will not be complete until the deliverables required by that stage are
complete.
Initiation Stage
In the Initiation Stage, either Meta-Xceed or the client identifies an area where a new
system, improvements to an existing system, or changed processes would significantly
enhance productivity. A Meta-Xceed consultant works with the client to define the
business objectives of the project.
Requirement Stage
During the Requirements Stage, the users establish and document the needs of the
business functions. The requirements will define what the system should do. The
Validation Protocols and Plans are established in order that documented evidence that
the system has been validated by the time it is put into production.
Deliverables
Project Plan
User Requirements
Validation Protocols
Design Stage
In the Design Stage, the developers prepare a functional specification which describes
how the proposed systems solution will meet user requirements. The developers then
produce a design specification which will define how the system will be constructed to
fulfill the functional specification.
Deliverables
Governing Structure Document
User Acceptance Test Plan
User Acceptance Test Cases
User Acceptance Test Case Traceability Matrix
System Architecture Specification Document
Functional Specification
Rollout Plan
Training Plan
Project Coding Standards
Design Specification
System Test Plan
Database Architecture ER Diagram
Development Stage
In the Development, the developers translate design specifications into Stage computer
programs and perform unit and integration testing on the programs.
Deliverables
Functional Review Report
System Test Cases
System Test Case Traceability Matrix
Source and Executable Code
Deliverable
System Test Summary Report
Deliverable
User Acceptance Test Summary Report
Rollout Stage
In the Rollout Stage, users are trained and provided with operating procedures. The
system is installed in a QA environment and tested to ensure it operates as intended
throughout its anticipated operating range.
Deliverables
SOPs and Guidelines
Training Manuals
Training Logs
Validation Summary Report
Completed Installation Qualification/Operational Qualification Document
Production Stage
In the Production Stage, the system may experience bug fixes, enhancements, and
upgrades to maintain or increase its performance and functionality.
Deliverables
Summary Report
Change Request
Retirement Stage
In the Retirement, the system is removed from the production Stage environment and
archived.
Deliverable
Decommission Plan
5.1. Purpose
This procedure describes the steps taken during the management of the SOP
documents. It will describe how the documents are to be authored, updated and
maintained to ensure proper relevance in the event of changes.
5.2. Scope
Any procedure which has a significant affect the software development of Meta-Xceed
applications, whether validated or not, on a production server requires a standard
operating procedure to be defined.
5.3. Procedure
The following procedure should be followed when a procedure is authored.
5.3.1. Identify SOP
Document the standard operating procedure in a way that best describe
how it is to be implemented.
Document the scope of the procedure to ensure that it is not overstating
other procedures.
Document the steps of procedure or definitions of the procedure.
5.3.2. Approval
Determine if the SOP needs review and approval.
Circulate document for review and approval.
Incorporate review and update the documentation for final approval
5.3.3. Implementation
Send updated SOP to all members which the SOP applies to for training.
Have team members sign and hold discussions for review of the SOP if
questions arise.
5.3.4. Review Changes
Identify changes as needs changes and update the SOP to fit the
current operating procedure. The steps of changes do not require an
authoring of a new SOP but the steps are similar to those from 5.3.1
through 5.3.3.
Review old SOP that has not been changed on a yearly basis to ensure
that SOPs matches the way the procedures are intended.
6. Training Methods
Code: 1006 CFR: 18251
Effective Date: January 31, 2003
Approved By: Sy Truong Approved Date: January 31, 2003
6.1. Purpose
This SOP defines and describes the Learning and Development programs and the
training activities available. This SOP applies to all Meta-Xceed personnel.
6.2. Policy
6.3. Procedures
1.1.1. Core Curriculum: New employee orientation, SOP/GDL training regulatory and
compliance training, job specific, and professional development training programs.
6.3.2. SOP/GDL Training: All employees will be trained on SOPs and GDLs
relevant to their job function. SOP/GDL training will be delivered in a
paper or online or formal presentation formats as appropriate.
7.1. Scope/Goals
The scope of Software Version Control Management will be to implement the
configuration management and some aspects of release management for all of the
software developed by Meta-Xceed.
7.2. Definitions
7.3. Process
The following is the general work process of updating modules to software.
8.1. Scope
The scope of source code conventions is to specify the format and documentation
requirements for software source code development. This will ensure the quality and
legibility of source code among the development team within Meta-Xceed.
8.2. Definitions
Program Header – This is captures comments that goes at the very top of each source
code program. It is not program logic but comments that describe the program.
Section Comments – The comments describing in plain English each section within a
program.
8.3. Procedures
Procedure Details
Starting new program All new program needs to have a standard
program header. This includes the program name,
description, input, output, author name and date.
Editing an existing Each section of logic within a program needs to
program have a section comment. This is a brief one or
two sentence describing the section. This appears
at the top of each section.
9.1. Purpose
This procedure describes the process of storing and maintaining documents for Meta-
Xceed. This will ensure that the latest versions of the documents are secured and
available.
9.2. Process
Storing Electronic Documents
Documents are authored in an electronic form and normally are stored as Microsoft
Word documents. The documents are stored in multiple computer servers on multiple
locations. One version will be stored at Meta-Xceed head quarters on the main server.
The second version is stored on a web server which is maintained by an internet
service provider (ISP) which Meta-Xceed contracts with. The ISP is Verio and servers
are maintained in Mountain View with additional backups in different locations through
out the United States. This will ensure that in an event that there is lost of data and
documents at one location, that the other location can be used to restore the files.
Maintaining Documents
All electronic and paper versions of documents are to be updated in a similar manner.
Old copies are placed a backup folder and the new updated versions are to be placed
in the designated folder. This ensures that the latest versions of the documents are in
the assigned folders while maintaining a history of older versions in a backup folder.
Accessing Documents
All electronic documents will be controlled by group permissions of the operating
system. On the main server within Meta-Xceed head quarters, NT groups will be set so
that appropriate read and write access are granted. Only administrators will have write
access. Similar privileges are set on the UNIX servers of the offsite mirrored locations.