DOT awards $416K for technical writing training, with delivery extending over 5 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $41,630 ($41.6K)

Contractor: Beacon Training Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2022-09-28

End Date: 2027-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,645 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: VENDOR TO PROVIDE COURSE DESIGN AND DELIVERY OF TWO TECHNICAL WRITING SKILLS COURSES AND LEVEL 3 EVALUATION QUESTIONS FOR EACH COURSE.

Place of Performance

Location: CAMBRIDGE, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02142

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $41,630.31 to BEACON TRAINING SERVICES, INC. for work described as: VENDOR TO PROVIDE COURSE DESIGN AND DELIVERY OF TWO TECHNICAL WRITING SKILLS COURSES AND LEVEL 3 EVALUATION QUESTIONS FOR EACH COURSE. Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the multi-year delivery and scope. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive pricing environment. 3. Contract duration of over 1600 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. This contract supports professional development within the Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $416,303.31 over approximately 5 years (1645 days) for technical writing courses and evaluation questions suggests a moderate annual investment. Benchmarking against similar professional development training contracts is difficult without more specific details on course content and delivery methods. However, the firm fixed-price structure implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the price remains competitive throughout the period.

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 offers. This typically leads to a more robust price discovery process and potentially lower prices for the government. The data indicates 5 offers were received, suggesting a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process ensures that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

Employees within the Department of Transportation, specifically the Immediate Office of the Secretary, will benefit from enhanced technical writing skills. The services delivered include the design and delivery of two technical writing courses, along with Level 3 evaluation questions for each. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the Department of Transportation's operational areas, primarily where the training is delivered. Workforce implications include improved communication capabilities and potentially increased efficiency in documentation and reporting for DOT personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Contract duration extends to March 2027, requiring ongoing budget allocation.
Scope is limited to technical writing, potentially excluding broader communication skill development.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract protects against cost escalation.
Full and open competition suggests competitive pricing.
Delivery order structure allows for phased execution and payment.

Sector Analysis

The professional and management development training sector is a significant component of government spending, supporting workforce readiness and skill enhancement across various agencies. This contract for technical writing falls within this broad category. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more granular data on specific training topics and delivery modalities, but government investment in employee training is a consistent area of expenditure.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from this particular award. The competition was open to all responsible sources.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Transportation's contracting and program management offices. As a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle (likely MAS), the specific oversight mechanisms would be defined by the terms of that vehicle. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Professional Development Training
Technical Skills Training
Employee Training and Development
Management and Administrative Support Services

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may lead to outdated curriculum.
Effectiveness measurement relies heavily on contractor-provided evaluations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $41,630.31 to BEACON TRAINING SERVICES, INC.. VENDOR TO PROVIDE COURSE DESIGN AND DELIVERY OF TWO TECHNICAL WRITING SKILLS COURSES AND LEVEL 3 EVALUATION QUESTIONS FOR EACH COURSE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BEACON TRAINING SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $41,630.31.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-09-28. End: 2027-03-31.

What is the specific content and learning objectives for the two technical writing courses?

The provided data specifies the need for 'course design and delivery of two technical writing skills courses and Level 3 evaluation questions for each course.' However, the exact content, duration, and specific learning objectives for these courses are not detailed in the summary data. Level 3 evaluations typically assess behavior change, meaning the courses aim to equip participants with skills that they will apply on the job. Without further details on the curriculum, it's challenging to assess the precise relevance and effectiveness of the training beyond the general goal of improving technical writing.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar technical writing training services procured by other federal agencies?

Direct price comparison is difficult without knowing the specific curriculum, duration, number of participants, and delivery method (e.g., in-person, virtual, self-paced) for these courses. The total contract value is $416,303.31 over approximately 5 years. If we assume an average of 10 courses delivered per year, that's roughly $83,260 per year. If each course serves 20 participants, the cost per participant per course would be around $416. This figure needs to be contextualized with the depth and quality of the training. The firm fixed-price nature and full and open competition suggest the government sought competitive pricing, but a true benchmark requires more detailed service specifications.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract spanning over five years for training services?

A significant risk with a multi-year contract for training is the potential for the curriculum to become outdated or misaligned with evolving agency needs. Technology and best practices in technical writing can change rapidly. Another risk is contractor performance degradation over time, although the firm fixed-price structure incentivizes the contractor to maintain quality. Furthermore, the agency's needs might shift, making the originally procured training less relevant, which could lead to underutilization or the need for costly modifications. The long duration also ties up agency funds that could potentially be reallocated if needs change.

What is the track record of Beacon Training Services, Inc. in delivering similar government contracts?

The provided data identifies Beacon Training Services, Inc. as the contractor. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving technical writing or professional development training. This would involve reviewing contract databases for previous awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of contract disputes or terminations. Without access to this specific performance history, it's impossible to definitively assess their reliability and quality in delivering government training services.

How will the effectiveness of the technical writing training be measured beyond Level 3 evaluations?

The contract specifies the development of Level 3 evaluation questions, which focus on assessing whether participants apply the learned skills on the job. While this is a valuable metric for behavioral change, the overall effectiveness of the training program could be further measured through other means. This might include tracking improvements in the quality or clarity of official documentation produced by trained employees, reductions in errors or rework related to technical documents, or qualitative feedback from supervisors on the enhanced skills of their staff. Measuring the impact on broader agency communication goals would also provide a more comprehensive view of effectiveness.

What is the historical spending trend for professional and management development training within the Department of Transportation?

The provided data is specific to this single contract award. To understand historical spending trends for professional and management development training at the Department of Transportation, a broader analysis of historical contract data would be required. This would involve querying federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) for all contracts categorized under professional development, management training, and related services awarded by DOT over several fiscal years. Analyzing these trends would reveal patterns in spending, identify key service providers, and indicate the agency's sustained investment in workforce development.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Business Schools and Computer and Management Training › Professional and Management Development Training

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1229 MOHAWK TRL, RICHARDSON, TX, 75080

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $44,275

Exercised Options: $41,630

Current Obligation: $41,630

Actual Outlays: $38,342

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS02F0185P

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline