DOJ awards $2.2M contract for drug abuse program evaluation to Texas Christian University

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,232,987 ($2.2M)

Contractor: Texas Christian University

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2021-09-17

End Date: 2026-09-17

Contract Duration: 1,826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: DRUG ABUSE PROGRAMS EVALUATION

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WORTH, TARRANT County, TEXAS, 76129

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $2.2 million to TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY for work described as: DRUG ABUSE PROGRAMS EVALUATION Key points: 1. Contract focuses on professional, scientific, and technical services for program evaluation. 2. Awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration of 1826 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. Texas Christian University, the awardee, likely possesses specialized expertise in this area. 5. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide budget certainty. 6. This award falls under the 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' NAICS code.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more specific details on the scope of work and deliverables. However, a $2.2 million award over five years for program evaluation services is not unusual for a university research institution. The fixed-price nature of the contract suggests an attempt to manage costs, but the ultimate value for money will depend on the quality and impact of the evaluation findings. Further comparison to similar program evaluation contracts by other federal agencies would be beneficial.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The number of bidders is not specified, but this method generally promotes price discovery and allows the government to select the most advantageous offer. The open competition suggests that the government sought a broad range of qualified entities to perform the drug abuse program evaluation.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that is intended to secure the best possible price and quality for the evaluation services, ensuring funds are used efficiently.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Federal Prison System and the Bureau of Prisons, which will receive insights into the effectiveness of their drug abuse programs. The services delivered include professional, scientific, and technical expertise for evaluating program outcomes. The geographic impact is primarily within the Bureau of Prisons facilities, though the findings could influence national drug abuse program strategies. Workforce implications are likely minimal, focusing on specialized evaluators rather than a large operational workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value and impact of the evaluation.
The broad NAICS code 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' could encompass a wide range of activities, leading to potential scope creep if not tightly managed.
Limited information on the specific drug abuse programs being evaluated hinders a deeper understanding of the contract's strategic importance.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process.
The fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Texas Christian University's selection suggests a reliance on established academic and research expertise in program evaluation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on program evaluation. This sector is crucial for government agencies seeking to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of their initiatives. Comparable spending in this area can vary widely depending on the complexity and scale of the programs being evaluated. Universities and specialized research firms often compete for these types of contracts, leveraging their analytical capabilities.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. Given the nature of program evaluation and the award to a university, it is unlikely that significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses are a primary focus, unless specialized data collection or analysis is required.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight of this contract would typically reside with the contracting officer and program managers within the Department of Justice's Federal Prison System. Accountability measures would be tied to the delivery of evaluation reports and findings according to the contract's statement of work. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though the detailed methodologies and findings of the evaluation itself may be internal.

Related Government Programs

Drug Abuse Treatment Programs
Criminal Justice Program Evaluation
Federal Reentry Programs
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Grants

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep due to broad NAICS code.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Limited public information on the specific programs being evaluated.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $2.2 million to TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY. DRUG ABUSE PROGRAMS EVALUATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-09-17. End: 2026-09-17.

What is the specific methodology Texas Christian University will employ for the drug abuse program evaluation?

The provided data does not specify the exact methodology Texas Christian University will use for the drug abuse program evaluation. Typically, such evaluations involve a mixed-methods approach, potentially including quantitative analysis of program data (e.g., recidivism rates, treatment completion), qualitative data collection through interviews or focus groups with participants and staff, and comparative analysis against established benchmarks or control groups. The contract's statement of work would detail the required methodologies, data sources, and analytical frameworks to ensure the evaluation is rigorous and provides actionable insights for the Bureau of Prisons.

How does the $2.2 million contract value compare to similar federal program evaluations?

The $2.2 million contract value for a five-year drug abuse program evaluation is within a reasonable range for federal contracts of this nature, especially when awarded to a research institution like a university. However, direct comparisons are difficult without knowing the precise scope, number of programs evaluated, and depth of analysis required. Larger, more complex evaluations involving multiple agencies or extensive data collection could cost significantly more, while smaller, more focused assessments might be awarded for less. The fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope, which helps in cost control compared to cost-plus contracts.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this drug abuse program evaluation contract?

Key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract are not explicitly detailed in the provided data. However, for a program evaluation, typical KPIs would likely revolve around the timely delivery of high-quality evaluation reports, adherence to the agreed-upon methodology, accuracy and validity of findings, and the actionable nature of recommendations provided to the Bureau of Prisons. The ultimate success would be measured by how effectively the evaluation informs improvements in drug abuse treatment programs within the federal prison system, potentially impacting recidivism rates and rehabilitation outcomes.

What is Texas Christian University's track record in conducting federal program evaluations, particularly in the criminal justice or substance abuse fields?

The provided data does not detail Texas Christian University's specific track record in conducting federal program evaluations. However, as a university, it is presumed to have academic departments and research centers with expertise in social sciences, public policy, and potentially criminology or psychology, which are relevant to drug abuse program evaluation. Federal agencies often contract with universities due to their research capabilities and established credibility. A deeper dive into TCU's past performance reports, published research, and previous government contracts would be necessary to fully assess their relevant experience and success.

What historical spending patterns exist for drug abuse program evaluations within the Department of Justice or Bureau of Prisons?

Historical spending patterns for drug abuse program evaluations within the Department of Justice (DOJ) or Bureau of Prisons (BOP) are not provided in the data. However, federal agencies consistently allocate funds for program evaluation to ensure accountability and effectiveness. Spending in this area can fluctuate based on budget appropriations, policy priorities, and the number of programs requiring assessment. Examining historical contract databases (like FPDS or USASpending) for similar NAICS codes and agencies would reveal trends in contract values, awardees, and the frequency of such evaluations over time.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 15BNAS21Q00000039

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2800 S UNIVERSITY DR, FORT WORTH, TX, 76129

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Private), Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,232,987

Exercised Options: $2,232,987

Current Obligation: $2,232,987

Actual Outlays: $1,117,282

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 15BNAS21D00000666

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline