Treasury awards $19.5M contract for public infrastructure finance capacity building

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,520 ($19.5K)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of the Treasury

Start Date: 2026-04-05

End Date: 2027-04-04

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $54/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO STRENGTHEN THE CAPACITY OF HOST GOVERNMENTS TO EFFECTIVELY DEVELOP AND FINANCE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. NEW AWARD.

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20220

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Treasury obligated $19,520.4 to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO STRENGTHEN THE CAPACITY OF HOST GOVERNMENTS TO EFFECTIVELY DEVELOP AND FINANCE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. NEW AWARD. Key points: 1. Contract aims to bolster host government capabilities in public infrastructure development and financing. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration of 364 days indicates a focused, short-term engagement. 4. Awarded to domestic entities, with specific awardees undisclosed. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 928120 points to international affairs and general government support. 6. The contract type is a definitive contract, suggesting a clear scope of work. 7. The cost-no-fee pricing structure implies the government will reimburse allowable costs without an additional fee.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $19.5 million for a 364-day period for international affairs capacity building appears within a reasonable range for specialized consulting services. Benchmarking against similar contracts for technical assistance in public finance and infrastructure development would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The cost-no-fee structure means the government bears the cost risk, but it also avoids paying a profit margin, which can be advantageous if costs are well-managed.

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 a bid. With 6 bids received, this suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more innovative solutions as contractors vie for the award.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing the best value by encouraging multiple bidders to offer competitive pricing and services.

Public Impact

Host governments in developing nations will benefit from enhanced capacity to manage public infrastructure projects. Services delivered will focus on strengthening financial and developmental capabilities for infrastructure. The geographic impact is international, supporting global public infrastructure initiatives. Workforce implications include the potential for specialized consultants and technical experts to be engaged.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of disclosed awardees makes it difficult to assess contractor track record and past performance.
Cost-no-fee structure shifts cost risk to the government, requiring diligent oversight of expenditures.
The broad nature of 'strengthening capacity' could lead to scope creep if not tightly managed.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
The contract's focus on public infrastructure development addresses a critical global need.
A defined period of performance (364 days) provides a clear timeframe for achieving objectives.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on management and technical consulting related to public finance and infrastructure. The market for such services is global, with significant government and international organization spending aimed at improving developing economies' infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within agencies like the World Bank, regional development banks, and other foreign aid organizations that fund similar capacity-building initiatives.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting requirements for small businesses. Without further details on the prime contractor's small business subcontracting plan, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear. However, the nature of the work might involve specialized expertise that could be sourced from various firms, potentially including small businesses as subcontractors if the prime contractor chooses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by the Department of the Treasury's relevant program office responsible for international affairs and development finance. Accountability measures would be tied to the contract's performance work statement and deliverables. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, though specific details of the awarded entities are undisclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract funds.

Related Government Programs

International Development Assistance
Public Finance Management Consulting
Infrastructure Project Finance
Government Capacity Building Programs
Foreign Assistance Programs

Risk Flags

Undisclosed Awardees
Cost-Reimbursement Risk
Measuring Intangible Capacity Building Outcomes
Host Government Engagement Dependency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Treasury awarded $19,520.4 to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TO STRENGTHEN THE CAPACITY OF HOST GOVERNMENTS TO EFFECTIVELY DEVELOP AND FINANCE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. NEW AWARD.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Treasury (Departmental Offices).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19,520.4.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-05. End: 2027-04-04.

What is the specific expertise of the undisclosed domestic awardees for this contract?

The provided data does not disclose the specific domestic awardees for this contract, making it impossible to detail their expertise. Typically, contracts of this nature are awarded to firms with demonstrated experience in public finance, infrastructure development, economic policy, and international development. Such firms often employ economists, financial analysts, engineers, and policy advisors who possess specialized knowledge in areas like project feasibility studies, public-private partnerships (PPPs), municipal finance, and regulatory frameworks for infrastructure investment. To ascertain the specific expertise, one would need to access the contract award details directly, which are often available through government contracting databases or agency transparency portals, assuming they are not redacted for proprietary reasons.

How does the $19.5 million cost compare to similar international capacity-building contracts?

Directly comparing the $19.5 million cost to similar international capacity-building contracts requires access to a broader dataset of comparable awards. However, for a 364-day contract focused on strengthening host government capacity for public infrastructure development and finance, this figure suggests a significant investment. Contracts in this domain can vary widely based on the scope of work, the number of countries or regions involved, the level of expertise required, and the duration. For instance, a contract supporting a single country's policy reform might be smaller, while a multi-regional program involving extensive technical assistance and training could exceed this amount. The cost-no-fee structure also means the government is reimbursing direct costs plus indirect costs, so the total expenditure is directly tied to the resources utilized by the contractor.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they mitigated?

Primary risks for this contract include the potential for ineffective capacity building if host government buy-in is low, challenges in measuring tangible outcomes, and the risk of cost overruns due to the cost-no-fee structure. Mitigation strategies would involve rigorous performance monitoring, clearly defined deliverables and key performance indicators (KPIs) tied to measurable improvements in host government processes, and strong project management by the Treasury. Ensuring strong local partnerships and stakeholder engagement from the outset is crucial for buy-in. Furthermore, the Treasury would need to implement robust financial oversight to manage costs effectively under the cost-no-fee arrangement, verifying the allowability and allocability of all expenses incurred by the contractor.

What is the expected impact of this contract on public infrastructure development in recipient countries?

The expected impact is to enhance the ability of host governments to effectively plan, develop, and finance public infrastructure projects. This could translate into improved project selection based on sound economic and financial analysis, better structuring of financing mechanisms (including public-private partnerships), and more efficient project execution. By strengthening these capacities, recipient countries may be better positioned to attract investment, reduce project delays and cost overruns, and ultimately deliver essential infrastructure services to their populations more effectively. The ultimate goal is to foster sustainable economic growth and improve quality of life through better infrastructure.

How does the 'full and open competition' process influence the value received by taxpayers?

The 'full and open competition' process is designed to maximize value for taxpayers by ensuring a wide range of potential contractors can compete for the work. This broad competition typically drives down prices as contractors strive to offer the most competitive bids to win the contract. It also encourages innovation, as companies may propose more efficient or effective methods to deliver the required services. Furthermore, a competitive process increases transparency and reduces the risk of favorit-ism or awarding contracts at inflated prices. The Treasury received 6 bids, indicating a sufficient level of competition to likely achieve favorable pricing and service quality for the taxpayer.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Public Administration › National Security and International Affairs › International Affairs

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 2032K826R00010

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $1,150,066

Exercised Options: $216,620

Current Obligation: $19,520

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline