USAID's $25.3M Biodiversity Conservation Contract Awarded to ARD, Inc. Under Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $25,323,854 ($25.3M)

Contractor: ARD, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2018-05-07

End Date: 2024-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,338 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: MIKAJY - SITE-BASED INTERVENTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $25.3 million to ARD, INC. for work described as: MIKAJY - SITE-BASED INTERVENTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the contract's duration and cost-plus-fixed-fee structure, which incentivizes contractor efficiency. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust market for these services, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The contract's duration of over 6 years indicates a long-term commitment to biodiversity conservation efforts. 4. Performance context is critical for assessing the effectiveness of site-based interventions in diverse ecological settings. 5. Sector positioning is within environmental conservation, a key area for international development agencies. 6. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) allows for flexibility but requires careful oversight to manage costs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $25.3 million over approximately 6.5 years suggests an average annual spend of around $3.9 million. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure implies that the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee, which can be efficient if costs are well-managed. Benchmarking against similar large-scale biodiversity conservation contracts managed by USAID or other international development agencies would provide a clearer picture of pricing competitiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of four bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this type of environmental conservation work. This competitive process is designed to ensure that the government receives the best value by selecting the most technically capable and cost-effective solution from a range of market participants.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces and encouraging innovation among contractors vying for the award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely local communities and ecosystems in regions targeted for biodiversity conservation interventions. Services delivered include technical assistance, capacity building, and implementation of conservation strategies at specific sites. Geographic impact will depend on the specific project locations chosen by USAID, potentially spanning multiple countries or regions. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for local conservationists, researchers, and project managers, as well as support for international environmental expertise.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns under the CPFF structure if not rigorously monitored.
Effectiveness of 'site-based interventions' can be highly variable and dependent on local conditions and stakeholder engagement.
Measuring the long-term impact and sustainability of biodiversity conservation efforts can be complex.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process and potential for good value.
The contract duration allows for sustained effort and potential for significant impact in conservation areas.
Focus on biodiversity conservation aligns with global environmental priorities and sustainable development goals.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the environmental consulting and services sector, which is a significant component of the broader professional services market supporting government agencies. The market for biodiversity conservation services is driven by increasing global awareness of environmental issues and the need for sustainable resource management. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large-scale conservation projects funded by international development organizations and national environmental agencies, often involving complex ecological assessments, community engagement, and long-term monitoring.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. The primary contractor, ARD, Inc., is a medium-sized business. The absence of specific small business set-asides or subcontracting plans suggests that the focus was on securing the most qualified large or medium-sized entity for this complex conservation work. This may limit direct opportunities for small businesses to participate as prime contractors but could offer subcontracting possibilities depending on ARD, Inc.'s strategy.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Agency for International Development (USAID). Mechanisms likely include regular progress reports, site visits, financial audits, and performance reviews to ensure adherence to the contract's objectives and budget. Accountability is tied to the successful implementation of conservation interventions and the achievement of defined environmental outcomes. Transparency is typically managed through public contract databases and reporting requirements, though specific project details might be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

USAID Biodiversity Conservation Programs
Global Environment Facility (GEF) Grants
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Initiatives

Risk Flags

Contract duration exceeds 6 years, requiring sustained oversight.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure necessitates careful cost management and auditing.
Effectiveness of 'site-based interventions' is context-dependent and requires robust monitoring.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $25.3 million to ARD, INC.. MIKAJY - SITE-BASED INTERVENTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ARD, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Agency for International Development (Agency for International Development).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $25.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-05-07. End: 2024-09-30.

What is the track record of ARD, Inc. in managing large-scale international conservation contracts?

ARD, Inc. has a history of working on international development projects, including those related to environmental management and conservation. Their experience often involves implementing programs funded by agencies like USAID. Assessing their specific track record for large-scale biodiversity conservation contracts would require reviewing past project performance, client feedback, and any documented successes or challenges in similar ecological and geopolitical contexts. This includes evaluating their ability to manage complex budgets, coordinate diverse stakeholders, and achieve measurable conservation outcomes over extended periods. A deeper dive into their portfolio would reveal the scale and scope of previous conservation efforts they have led or significantly contributed to.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types for environmental services?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used when the scope of work is well-defined but the exact costs are uncertain, as is common in complex environmental projects. It reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee, which represents the contractor's profit. This structure incentivizes cost control because the fee remains constant regardless of the final cost. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility for the government if unforeseen issues arise, but requires robust oversight to prevent cost creep. Compared to Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF), CPFF lacks direct financial incentives for exceeding cost targets, potentially making it less efficient if cost savings are a primary objective. For environmental services, CPFF can be suitable for research, development, or implementation phases where adaptability is key.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically used to measure the success of biodiversity conservation interventions?

Key performance indicators for biodiversity conservation interventions often focus on ecological health, species protection, habitat restoration, and community engagement. Examples include: changes in population sizes of target species, increase in habitat area or quality, reduction in threats (e.g., poaching, deforestation), successful implementation of sustainable resource management practices by local communities, and improved local livelihoods linked to conservation. For this specific contract, USAID would likely have defined KPIs related to the specific ecosystems and species being targeted, as well as indicators for capacity building and policy influence. Measuring these KPIs requires baseline data and consistent monitoring over the contract's duration and potentially beyond.

What is the typical annual spending for USAID's biodiversity conservation efforts?

USAID's annual spending on biodiversity conservation can fluctuate significantly based on global priorities, congressional appropriations, and specific program needs. Historically, USAID has allocated substantial resources to biodiversity conservation as part of its broader environmental and natural resource management portfolio. While specific annual figures vary, the agency consistently invests hundreds of millions of dollars globally in conservation initiatives. This particular contract represents a portion of that overall investment. To understand the typical annual spending, one would need to analyze USAID's budget allocations and program expenditures over several fiscal years, looking at both direct funding for conservation and related activities across various bureaus and missions.

How does the geographic focus of this contract align with USAID's broader conservation strategy?

The geographic focus of this contract, while not explicitly detailed in the provided data, would align with USAID's broader conservation strategy which typically targets regions with high biodiversity, significant conservation threats, and opportunities for sustainable development. USAID often prioritizes areas in developing countries where conservation efforts can have the greatest impact on both ecological health and human well-being. This includes focusing on critical ecosystems like tropical forests, coral reefs, and wetlands, and working with local partners to build capacity, promote sustainable livelihoods, and influence policy. The 'site-based interventions' suggest a targeted approach within specific landscapes or ecosystems that are strategically important for conservation goals.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Social Advocacy Organizations › Environment, Conservation and Wildlife Organizations

Product/Service Code: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT › NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVERVAT SVCS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: SOL-687-17-000001

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Tetra Tech, Inc.

Address: 159 BANK ST STE 300, BURLINGTON, VT, 05401

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,323,854

Exercised Options: $25,323,854

Current Obligation: $25,323,854

Actual Outlays: $22,482,641

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 19

Total Subaward Amount: $13,130,631

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline