Department of Education awards $29M contract for educational support services to Council of the Great City Schools

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,069 ($29.1K)

Contractor: Council of the Great City Schools

Awarding Agency: Department of Education

Start Date: 2026-04-09

End Date: 2027-04-14

Contract Duration: 370 days

Daily Burn Rate: $79/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD / TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT TASK FORCE

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20004

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Education obligated $29,069.03 to COUNCIL OF THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS for work described as: NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD / TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT TASK FORCE Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies and market competition. 2. The duration of the contract (over a year) suggests a need for sustained support in educational assessment. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but the absence of competition limits benchmarking opportunities. 4. The awardee, Council of the Great City Schools, is a non-profit organization, potentially indicating a mission-driven approach. 5. The contract falls under Educational Support Services, a broad category with varying performance metrics. 6. Geographic focus on the District of Columbia may limit broader applicability of services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and the specific focus on the National Assessment Governing Board and Trial Urban District Assessment Task Force. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to assess if the $29 million represents a fair market price for the services rendered. The fixed-price structure provides some cost certainty, but the lack of comparative data makes a definitive value-for-money assessment difficult. Further analysis would require understanding the specific deliverables and comparing them to similar, competitively procured educational support contracts, if available.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed under SAP, indicating a sole-source award. The absence of a competitive bidding process means that multiple potential vendors were not evaluated, and the government did not benefit from the price discovery that typically occurs in a competitive environment. This approach is often used when a specific entity possesses unique qualifications or when urgency dictates a rapid award, but it limits the opportunity to secure the best possible pricing and service offerings.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not be receiving the most cost-effective solution due to the lack of competition. Without bids from other qualified organizations, it's harder to ensure that the awarded price reflects true market value and efficiency.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the National Assessment Governing Board and the Trial Urban District Assessment Task Force, which will receive essential support services. Services delivered are expected to aid in the assessment and evaluation of educational programs and policies. The geographic impact is centered on the District of Columbia, suggesting a focus on urban educational systems within that area. Workforce implications are not immediately clear but may involve support staff or subject matter experts contributing to the task force's objectives.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits transparency and potential cost savings.
Lack of competition may lead to higher than market prices.
Specific deliverables and performance metrics are not detailed, making outcome assessment difficult.

Positive Signals

Award to a known entity (Council of the Great City Schools) may ensure continuity and expertise.
Fixed-price contract provides budget certainty.
Contract supports critical national educational assessment initiatives.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Educational Support Services sector, which encompasses a wide range of services aimed at improving educational outcomes. The market for such services is diverse, including research, assessment, consulting, and administrative support. The award to the Council of the Great City Schools, an organization focused on urban education, suggests a specialized need within this sector. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more specific details on the services provided, but large-scale educational support contracts can range from millions to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside. Given the sole-source nature of the award, there are no immediate subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a competitive process. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for specific support.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Education's contracting and program offices. Accountability measures would be defined by the terms and conditions of the purchase order, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source award, and there is no explicit mention of Inspector General jurisdiction in the provided data, though the IG typically has broad oversight over federal spending.

Related Government Programs

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
Urban School District Initiatives
Educational Research and Development
Federal Education Policy Support

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
Limited transparency on specific deliverables and performance metrics.
Potential for non-optimal pricing due to lack of competition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Education awarded $29,069.03 to COUNCIL OF THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD / TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT TASK FORCE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COUNCIL OF THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Education (Department of Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29,069.03.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-09. End: 2027-04-14.

What is the specific expertise of the Council of the Great City Schools that justified a sole-source award for these educational support services?

The Council of the Great City Schools is a non-profit organization representing over 75 of the largest urban public school systems in the United States. Its expertise lies in advocating for urban education, sharing best practices, and conducting research relevant to the challenges faced by large, diverse school districts. For this specific contract, it is likely that the Council was identified as possessing unique knowledge or a specific role in the Trial Urban District Assessment Task Force or related initiatives, making them the sole entity capable of fulfilling the requirement without a competitive process. This could involve their established network, data access, or specific methodologies developed over years of working with urban school systems.

How does the $29 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar educational support services by the Department of Education?

Direct comparison of the $29 million contract value to historical spending on similar educational support services is challenging without more granular data on the specific services procured. The Department of Education engages in numerous contracts for research, assessment, and technical assistance. However, large-scale task forces and national assessment initiatives often involve significant funding. To provide a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify prior contracts with comparable scope, duration, and objectives, ideally those that were competitively procured to establish a benchmark. The sole-source nature of this award further complicates direct value comparisons.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or deliverables expected under this contract, and how will their achievement be measured?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or detailed deliverables for this contract. Typically, a purchase order of this magnitude would include a statement of work (SOW) outlining specific tasks, milestones, and expected outcomes. Performance measurement would likely involve regular progress reports, reviews of submitted work products (e.g., assessments, reports, recommendations), and potentially adherence to timelines. The effectiveness of the services will be evaluated based on the successful completion of these defined tasks and the quality of the outputs, contributing to the objectives of the National Assessment Governing Board and the Trial Urban District Assessment Task Force.

What is the track record of the Council of the Great City Schools in managing federal contracts, particularly those of similar size and scope?

The Council of the Great City Schools, as a prominent organization in the education sector, likely has experience managing grants and contracts, including those funded by federal agencies. However, specific details regarding their track record with federal contracts of this $29 million magnitude are not provided in the data. A thorough assessment would involve reviewing their past performance on federal awards, including timeliness of delivery, quality of work, and adherence to financial regulations. Their long-standing presence and focus on urban education suggest a capacity to handle complex projects, but the specifics of their federal contracting history would require further investigation.

Are there any identified risks associated with this sole-source award, such as potential cost overruns or lack of innovation?

The primary risk associated with this sole-source award is the potential for cost inefficiencies due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bids, there is a reduced incentive for the contractor to offer the lowest possible price. Additionally, a sole-source award might limit the introduction of innovative approaches or technologies that could have been brought forward by other potential bidders. There's also a risk related to the specific expertise required; if the Council of the Great City Schools' capabilities are narrowly focused, the breadth of solutions considered might be limited. Transparency and accountability are also key areas of risk mitigation that need careful oversight.

How does this contract align with the broader strategic goals of the Department of Education regarding educational assessment and urban school improvement?

This contract directly aligns with the Department of Education's strategic goals by supporting the National Assessment Governing Board and the Trial Urban District Assessment Task Force. These bodies are crucial for understanding national educational trends, evaluating program effectiveness, and informing policy decisions. The focus on urban districts, as indicated by the awardee, suggests a commitment to addressing the specific challenges and opportunities within these critical educational environments. The services procured are intended to provide data and insights that can lead to improved educational outcomes and more effective interventions for students in large cities.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Educational Support Services › Educational Support Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Solicitation ID: 91995926Q0003

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW # 1100N, WASHINGTON, DC, 20004

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $89,823

Exercised Options: $29,069

Current Obligation: $29,069

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline