BearingPoint, Inc. awarded $13M contract for economic policy reform consulting by USAID

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,069,511 ($13.1M)

Contractor: Bearingpoint, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2005-03-01

End Date: 2008-04-30

Contract Duration: 1,156 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ECONOMIC POLICY REFORM

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $13.1 million to BEARINGPOINT, INC. for work described as: ECONOMIC POLICY REFORM Key points: 1. Contract awarded for administrative management and general management consulting services. 2. The contract duration was 1156 days. 3. This was a full and open competition with two bidders. 4. The contract type was Cost Plus Fixed Fee. 5. The contract was awarded by the Agency for International Development. 6. The North American Industry Classification System code is 541611.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $13 million for a period of approximately three years for economic policy reform consulting appears to be within a reasonable range for such services. However, without specific benchmarks for similar USAID economic policy reform contracts or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed carefully, as it allows for reimbursement of allowable costs plus a fixed fee. Further analysis of the fixed fee percentage and the allowable costs would be needed for a more definitive valuation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. With two bidders participating, the competition level suggests a moderate degree of market interest. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of bidders typically leads to more robust price discovery and potentially lower prices for the government. The agency's approach ensured a competitive process, but the limited number of participants might have constrained the full benefits of competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition with two bidders provides a baseline level of price competition, which is beneficial for taxpayers. However, encouraging more bidders in future solicitations could potentially lead to greater cost savings for the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are likely USAID and potentially partner countries receiving assistance in economic policy reform. The services delivered involve consulting on administrative management and general management to support economic policy initiatives. The geographic impact is likely global, focusing on areas where USAID implements economic development programs. The contract supports the development and implementation of economic policies, indirectly impacting workforces in recipient countries through improved economic conditions.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts require diligent oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and the fixed fee is justified.
Limited competition (two bidders) may have resulted in a higher price than if more firms had competed.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, ensuring a fair process.
The contract addresses a critical area of economic policy reform, aligning with development goals.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the management and consulting services sector, specifically focusing on administrative and general management consulting. This sector is crucial for government agencies seeking expertise in policy development, implementation, and organizational efficiency. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized expertise. Benchmarking this contract's value against other similar consulting engagements by federal agencies for policy reform would provide further context on its market alignment.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is not discernible from this information. Future analysis would need to examine the prime contractor's subcontracting plan, if any, to assess opportunities for small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Agency for International Development (USAID). Mechanisms likely include regular progress reports from BearingPoint, Inc., performance reviews, and financial audits to ensure compliance with the contract terms and conditions. Transparency would be facilitated through USAID's contract reporting systems. The extent of Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction would depend on USAID's internal policies and the nature of any potential issues arising during contract performance.

Related Government Programs

USAID Economic Development Programs
International Development Consulting Services
Government Management Consulting Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF contract type.
Limited competition may have impacted price competitiveness.
Effectiveness dependent on external factors beyond contractor control.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $13.1 million to BEARINGPOINT, INC.. ECONOMIC POLICY REFORM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BEARINGPOINT, 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 $13.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-03-01. End: 2008-04-30.

What was BearingPoint, Inc.'s track record with USAID prior to this award?

Information regarding BearingPoint, Inc.'s specific track record with USAID prior to this particular award is not detailed in the provided data snippet. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing USAID's contract database and past performance evaluations for BearingPoint, Inc. on previous contracts. This would include examining the types of services they provided, their performance ratings, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. Understanding their prior relationship with the agency can offer insights into their capabilities and reliability for executing complex consulting projects like economic policy reform.

How does the $13 million award compare to similar economic policy reform contracts?

Comparing the $13 million award for economic policy reform consulting requires access to a broader dataset of similar contracts. Factors such as contract duration, scope of work, geographic focus, and the specific expertise required significantly influence contract value. Contracts for large-scale, multi-year international development projects with a policy reform component can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. Without specific comparable contract data from USAID or other agencies undertaking similar initiatives, it is difficult to definitively benchmark this award. However, for a three-year engagement involving complex policy analysis and reform, $13 million appears to be within a plausible range, assuming a moderate scope.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for consulting services?

The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, like the one awarded to BearingPoint, Inc., is the potential for cost overruns. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with a predictable profit margin, the 'cost-plus' component means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred. If the contractor's costs exceed initial estimates, the government bears that burden. This necessitates robust oversight from the agency to scrutinize allowable costs and ensure efficiency. The risk for the government is paying more than anticipated if costs escalate, while the contractor is incentivized to control costs to protect their fixed fee profit margin.

How effective are consulting contracts in achieving economic policy reform goals?

The effectiveness of consulting contracts in achieving economic policy reform goals is highly variable and depends on numerous factors beyond the contract itself. Key determinants include the clarity and feasibility of the reform objectives, the quality of the consulting expertise provided, the level of commitment and cooperation from the host government or implementing bodies, and the broader political and economic context. While consultants can provide valuable analysis, recommendations, and technical assistance, sustainable reform often requires strong local ownership and capacity building. This contract likely aims to leverage external expertise to support USAID's development objectives, but its ultimate success hinges on effective implementation and integration with local efforts.

What has been USAID's historical spending on management and consulting services?

USAID's historical spending on management and general management consulting services (NAICS code 541611) is substantial, reflecting the agency's reliance on external expertise for program implementation, policy analysis, and operational support. Annual spending can fluctuate based on program priorities, funding levels, and specific project needs. To provide precise historical figures, one would need to access aggregated federal procurement data, such as from USAspending.gov, filtering by agency (USAID) and the relevant NAICS code over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends, identify major contractors, and indicate the overall investment in this service category.

What is the typical duration for contracts of this nature?

The typical duration for contracts involving economic policy reform consulting can vary significantly based on the complexity and scope of the reforms, the geographic region, and the funding cycle. Contracts can range from short-term advisory engagements lasting a few months to multi-year programs spanning several years. The 1156-day duration (approximately 3.17 years) for this BearingPoint, Inc. contract is consistent with a substantial, multi-year effort aimed at achieving meaningful policy changes. Shorter contracts might focus on specific analyses or training, while longer durations are often necessary for implementation support and monitoring of reform progress.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

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: EF17604011

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1676 INTERNATIONAL DR, MC LEAN, VA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $136,742,843

Exercised Options: $81,301,944

Current Obligation: $13,069,511

Timeline