Transportation's $142K purchase order for aquatic mitigation credits in California awarded to National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $142,000 ($142.0K)

Contractor: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2026-04-10

End Date: 2026-06-10

Contract Duration: 61 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: CA FLAP PLU 406(1) QUINCY JUNCTION ROAD AQUATIC MITIGATION CREDITS - ILF PROGRAM

Place of Performance

Location: QUINCY, PLUMAS County, CALIFORNIA, 95971

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $142,000 to NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION for work described as: CA FLAP PLU 406(1) QUINCY JUNCTION ROAD AQUATIC MITIGATION CREDITS - ILF PROGRAM Key points: 1. Value for money assessed against similar environmental mitigation projects. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a sole-source award, potentially impacting price. 3. Risk indicators include the short duration and fixed-price nature. 4. Performance context is limited due to the nature of mitigation credits. 5. Sector positioning within environmental services and infrastructure development. 6. The contract supports the ILF Program's conservation goals.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $142,000 for aquatic mitigation credits appears reasonable for a specialized environmental service. However, without detailed benchmarks for similar ILF program projects in California or comparable states, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The fixed-price nature provides cost certainty, but the lack of competition limits the ability to determine if the price reflects the best possible market rate. Further analysis would require comparing the quantity and quality of mitigation credits provided against other available options.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed under standard procurement procedures, indicating a sole-source award. The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation was directly awarded this purchase order. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for other qualified entities to bid, which can limit price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs for the government compared to a competitive process. The rationale for a sole-source award would typically involve unique capabilities or a specific relationship with the entity.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not be receiving the most cost-effective solution due to the absence of competitive bidding. This could result in a higher price for the required aquatic mitigation credits.

Public Impact

Benefits the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation by providing funding for their conservation programs. Delivers essential aquatic mitigation credits required for infrastructure projects, ensuring environmental compliance. Geographic impact is focused on California, addressing specific environmental needs within the state. Workforce implications are indirect, supporting conservation professionals and related environmental services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to suboptimal pricing.
Short contract duration (61 days) could indicate a time-sensitive need or limited scope.
Reliance on a single provider for critical mitigation services.

Positive Signals

Supports a recognized conservation organization (National Fish and Wildlife Foundation).
Addresses a specific environmental requirement (aquatic mitigation credits).
Fixed-price contract provides budget certainty.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the environmental services and conservation sector, specifically related to mitigation banking and compliance for infrastructure projects. The market for environmental mitigation credits is driven by regulatory requirements, particularly under programs like the Interagency Mitigation Banking Program (ILF). Spending in this area is often project-specific and tied to federal agency needs for environmental offsets. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other ILF program awards or similar mitigation credit purchases by agencies like the Federal Highway Administration.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve a small business set-aside, nor is there information suggesting subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The award to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, a non-profit organization, suggests a focus on programmatic goals rather than direct small business engagement through this specific award. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal for this particular transaction.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this purchase order would primarily fall under the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Department of Transportation. Accountability measures would be tied to the delivery of the specified aquatic mitigation credits and adherence to the terms of the purchase order. Transparency is facilitated by public contract databases, though detailed performance metrics may not be readily available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Interagency Mitigation Banking Program (ILF)
Environmental Mitigation Services
Conservation Programs
Infrastructure Project Compliance

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition.
Potential for overpayment due to lack of competitive bidding.
Dependency on a single provider for critical environmental services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $142,000 to NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION. CA FLAP PLU 406(1) QUINCY JUNCTION ROAD AQUATIC MITIGATION CREDITS - ILF PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $142,000.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-10. End: 2026-06-10.

What is the specific nature and quantity of the aquatic mitigation credits being purchased?

The provided data indicates the purchase is for 'CA FLAP PLU 406(1) QUINCY JUNCTION ROAD AQUATIC MITIGATION CREDITS - ILF PROGRAM'. While the exact quantity of credits is not specified in the abbreviated data, the description suggests these credits are intended to offset environmental impacts, likely related to infrastructure development, under the ILF program in California. These credits represent restored, created, or preserved aquatic habitats that provide ecological functions equivalent to the impacts they are meant to compensate for. Further details on the specific ecological metrics and the number of credits would be found in the full contract documentation.

What is the track record of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in delivering similar aquatic mitigation credits?

The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) is a well-established non-profit organization with a significant track record in conservation and environmental restoration projects across the United States. They manage numerous grant programs and partnerships aimed at conserving fish, wildlife, and habitats. While NFWF primarily acts as a facilitator and funder for conservation efforts, they have extensive experience in overseeing projects that result in the creation or preservation of aquatic habitats. Their role in this contract is likely to ensure the delivery of credits through their established network or direct management of mitigation sites, leveraging their expertise in environmental program administration.

How does the $142,000 price compare to other aquatic mitigation credit purchases by the Federal Highway Administration?

Benchmarking the $142,000 price for aquatic mitigation credits is challenging without more specific data on the quantity and type of credits purchased. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) often procures mitigation services through various mechanisms, including direct purchase of credits, grants to mitigation banks, or inclusion in larger construction contracts. Prices for mitigation credits can vary significantly based on geographic location, the type of aquatic resource being mitigated (e.g., wetlands, streams), the ecological functions provided, and the specific regulatory requirements. A direct comparison would require analyzing similar ILF program credit purchases or other FHWA-funded mitigation efforts in California or comparable regions, considering the number of credits and the ecological services they represent.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract for aquatic mitigation credits?

The primary risk associated with this sole-source contract is the potential for paying a non-competitive price, as there was no opportunity for other providers to bid. This lack of competition can reduce the government's leverage in price negotiation. Another risk is the dependency on a single entity, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, for these critical environmental credits. If NFWF faces unforeseen challenges in delivering the credits, it could delay the underlying infrastructure project. The short duration of the contract (61 days) also presents a risk if the delivery of credits is more complex or time-consuming than anticipated, potentially leading to contract modifications or extensions.

What is the historical spending pattern for aquatic mitigation credits by the Federal Highway Administration in California?

Historical spending patterns for aquatic mitigation credits by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in California are not readily available in a summarized format. FHWA's mitigation spending is often integrated into broader transportation project budgets or managed through state departments of transportation. However, federal regulations, such as the Clean Water Act and related environmental policies, mandate mitigation for unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources caused by infrastructure projects. This necessitates consistent spending on mitigation, including the purchase of credits, across various states, including California. Analyzing specific project files or broader environmental compliance reports from FHWA would be necessary to detail historical spending trends for mitigation credits in the region.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Public Administration › Administration of Environmental Quality Programs › Administration of Conservation Programs

Product/Service Code: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT › NATURAL RESOURCES - OTHER SVCS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1625 EYE ST NW FL 3, WASHINGTON, DC, 20006

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $142,000

Exercised Options: $142,000

Current Obligation: $142,000

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline