USDA awards $10M contract for APEC-IV study to Westat, Inc., focusing on administrative management consulting

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,047,792 ($10.0M)

Contractor: Westat, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Agriculture

Start Date: 2020-09-18

End Date: 2026-09-27

Contract Duration: 2,200 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: THIS IS FOR THE FOURTH ACCESS, PARTICIPATION, AND ELIGIBILITY STUDY (APEC-IV)

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22301

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Agriculture obligated $10.0 million to WESTAT, INC. for work described as: THIS IS FOR THE FOURTH ACCESS, PARTICIPATION, AND ELIGIBILITY STUDY (APEC-IV) Key points: 1. The contract value of $10,047,792 represents a significant investment in understanding program participation and eligibility. 2. Westat, Inc. secured this award through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration of approximately 2200 days suggests a long-term commitment to data collection and analysis. 4. The primary service category, Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services, points to a need for expert guidance in program operations. 5. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability for the agency. 6. The absence of small business set-asides suggests the scope may not have been tailored for smaller entities or that larger firms were best positioned.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $10,047,792 for the Fourth Access, Participation, and Eligibility Study (APEC-IV) appears reasonable given the extensive duration of approximately 2200 days and the nature of comprehensive research and consulting services. Benchmarking against similar large-scale federal studies in administrative management and general management consulting would provide further context, but the fixed-price nature suggests an effort to manage costs effectively. Without specific per-unit cost data for deliverables, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the competitive award process implies a degree of price efficiency.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The data indicates there were 2 bids received, suggesting a moderate level of competition for this specific contract. While two bidders participated, the extent to which this represents robust competition for a contract of this magnitude and duration would ideally involve comparison to similar solicitations to understand if more bidders could have been attracted.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple companies to offer their best pricing and services, leading to potentially lower costs and higher quality outcomes compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely participants and potential participants in the programs studied by the Food and Nutrition Service, as improved understanding can lead to better access and eligibility. The services delivered include research, data analysis, and consulting to assess and improve access, participation, and eligibility for federal programs. The geographic impact is national, as the study likely covers programs administered across the United States. Workforce implications may include employment for researchers, analysts, and support staff at Westat, Inc., as well as potential impacts on federal agency staff involved in program administration and oversight.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep given the long duration and complex nature of eligibility and participation studies.
Reliance on a single contractor for a significant period could limit opportunities for innovation or alternative approaches.
Ensuring data integrity and objective analysis over the full contract term requires robust oversight.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a fair and transparent process.
Fixed-price contract type helps control costs and provides budget certainty.
Westat, Inc. is a known entity in the research and consulting space, potentially bringing established expertise.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services sector (NAICS 541611). This sector is characterized by firms providing expertise in organizational efficiency, strategic planning, and operational improvements for government and private entities. The market size for federal consulting services is substantial, with agencies frequently outsourcing complex analytical and advisory tasks. This contract represents a specific instance of federal agencies leveraging external expertise to address critical program evaluation needs, fitting within a broader trend of government reliance on specialized contractors for research and policy support.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the data indicates no indication of small business participation (sb: false). This suggests that the primary awardee, Westat, Inc., is likely a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this information, it is difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though it implies that opportunities for small business involvement may be limited unless subcontracting is pursued by the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service, the contracting agency. Accountability measures are embedded within the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring specific deliverables and performance standards to be met. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed internal oversight processes and Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on specific agency policies and the nature of any potential issues arising during contract performance.

Related Government Programs

Federal Program Evaluation Studies
Government Consulting Services
Administrative Management Services
Eligibility Determination Research
Food Assistance Program Analysis

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep or outdated methodologies.
Moderate competition (2 bidders) could potentially limit optimal price discovery.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting information.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Agriculture awarded $10.0 million to WESTAT, INC.. THIS IS FOR THE FOURTH ACCESS, PARTICIPATION, AND ELIGIBILITY STUDY (APEC-IV)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WESTAT, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Agriculture (Food and Nutrition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-18. End: 2026-09-27.

What is Westat, Inc.'s track record with similar federal contracts, particularly those involving large-scale studies and program evaluation?

Westat, Inc. has a significant history of performing research and evaluation services for various U.S. federal agencies. They are frequently awarded contracts related to social science research, survey design and implementation, and program evaluation. For instance, they have conducted studies for agencies like the National Center for Education Statistics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Social Security Administration. Their experience often involves complex data collection, analysis, and reporting on sensitive topics, aligning with the requirements of the APEC-IV study. A review of their past performance on similar contracts would likely reveal a pattern of successful delivery, though specific details on cost overruns or performance issues would require deeper investigation into contract histories.

How does the awarded amount of approximately $10 million for the APEC-IV study compare to previous iterations or similar federal studies?

Comparing the $10,047,792 award for APEC-IV to previous iterations requires specific historical data for the APEC I, II, and III studies. However, as a general benchmark, large-scale federal research and evaluation contracts, especially those spanning multiple years and involving national scope, often range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. The duration of approximately 2200 days (around 6 years) suggests a substantial undertaking. Similar studies by agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services or the Department of Labor for program evaluation or access research can also cost in the high single-digit to low double-digit millions. The fixed-price nature of this award suggests a defined scope, and the value appears commensurate with the expected effort for a comprehensive, multi-year study.

What are the key risks associated with a long-duration contract like APEC-IV, and how are they mitigated?

Key risks for a long-duration contract like APEC-IV (approx. 2200 days) include potential scope creep, changes in program requirements or policy over time, contractor performance degradation, and evolving data collection methodologies or technologies. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust contract management by the agency, including clear performance metrics, regular progress reviews, and change control processes. For scope creep, a well-defined SOW and strict adherence to modification procedures are crucial. Contractor performance is monitored through deliverable acceptance and performance evaluations. Adapting to policy changes might require contract modifications, negotiated under the existing contract's terms. Technological evolution is managed by allowing flexibility in methodologies where appropriate, while ensuring data integrity remains paramount.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' approach likely to be in ensuring the best value for taxpayers on this specific contract?

The 'full and open competition' approach is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring best value for taxpayers, as it maximizes the pool of potential bidders and encourages competitive pricing and innovation. In this case, with two bids received for the APEC-IV study, the competition was present, though the level of intensity could be debated. If the two bidders represented strong, capable organizations with competitive proposals, then taxpayers likely benefited from a more efficient price discovery process than if it were sole-source. However, the ultimate value depends on the quality of the proposals submitted and the agency's ability to evaluate them effectively against the stated requirements. A higher number of bidders often correlates with stronger price competition.

What are the potential implications of the fixed-price contract type on the quality and flexibility of the APEC-IV study?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type, like the one used for APEC-IV, aims to provide cost certainty for the government by establishing a set price for the defined scope of work. This incentivizes the contractor, Westat, Inc., to control costs and perform efficiently. For quality, FFP contracts can sometimes lead contractors to cut corners if not managed rigorously, although this is less likely for a reputable research firm on a high-profile study. Flexibility can be a concern; significant changes to the study's scope or methodology may require formal contract modifications, which can be time-consuming and potentially costly. However, for a study with a defined research objective like APEC-IV, an FFP contract is often appropriate for managing budget predictability.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7501 WISCONSIN AVE STE 1000E, BETHESDA, MD, 20814

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,382,946

Exercised Options: $10,047,792

Current Obligation: $10,047,792

Actual Outlays: $8,802,016

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00F009DA

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline