USAID's $19.77M MEL Program Awarded to The QED Group LLC for Technical Services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,769,956 ($19.8M)

Contractor: THE QED Group LLC

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2013-06-24

End Date: 2018-09-23

Contract Duration: 1,917 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 12

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF USAID/UGANDA'S MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PROGRAM

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $19.8 million to THE QED GROUP LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF USAID/UGANDA'S MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PROGRAM Key points: 1. The contract's value of $19.77 million over approximately five years suggests a significant investment in monitoring, evaluation, and learning capabilities. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, the contract indicates a market where multiple firms were likely considered, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' NAICS code is broad, suggesting a wide range of potential activities and a need for specialized expertise. 4. The contract duration of 1917 days (over 5 years) allows for sustained program support and the development of long-term impact. 5. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee, which can incentivize cost control. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests the competition was not specifically targeted to small businesses, though they may have participated as subcontractors.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19.77 million over nearly five years for monitoring, evaluation, and learning services appears reasonable given the scope of work typically associated with USAID programs. Benchmarking against similar large-scale MEL contracts for international development agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The CPFF structure, while common, requires careful oversight to ensure costs remain within reasonable bounds and the fixed fee adequately compensates the contractor for their services.

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 an offer. The presence of 10 bidders suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this type of service. This broad competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensures that the government has a wide pool of qualified contractors to choose from, potentially leading to better value.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this contract helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging high-quality service delivery.

Public Impact

Beneficiaries include USAID and its implementing partners, who receive enhanced data and insights to improve program effectiveness in Uganda. Services delivered focus on monitoring, evaluation, and learning, crucial for assessing development outcomes and adapting strategies. The geographic impact is centered on Uganda, where USAID implements various development programs. Workforce implications include the employment of technical experts in monitoring, evaluation, data analysis, and program management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in CPFF contracts if not closely managed.
Broad NAICS code could lead to scope creep if not clearly defined.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical MEL functions over an extended period.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process.
Significant contract value suggests a critical need and commitment to program improvement.
Long contract duration allows for sustained impact and knowledge building.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on evaluation and data analysis for international development. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms specializing in monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) for government agencies, particularly those involved in foreign aid. USAID, as a major purchaser, frequently awards large contracts in this space to support its global development objectives. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large MEL contracts awarded by USAID or similar agencies like the Department of State or the Millennium Challenge Corporation.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the data indicates the contractor, The QED Group LLC, is not a small business. This suggests that opportunities for small businesses would primarily arise through subcontracting. The extent of small business participation would depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the specific needs of the program, which are not detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by USAID's contracting officers and program officials, ensuring compliance with contract terms and performance standards. Accountability measures are built into the CPFF structure, requiring justification of costs and delivery of fixed-fee services. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases and reporting requirements. While no specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction is mentioned, USAID's Office of Inspector General (OIG) would have oversight authority for potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

USAID Monitoring and Evaluation Programs
International Development Assistance
Technical Assistance Contracts
Professional and Technical Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF structure.
Scope definition and management challenges.
Contractor performance over extended duration.
Alignment of fixed fee with evolving costs/market.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $19.8 million to THE QED GROUP LLC. IGF::OT::IGF USAID/UGANDA'S MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE QED GROUP LLC.

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 $19.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-06-24. End: 2018-09-23.

What is the track record of The QED Group LLC with USAID and similar agencies?

The QED Group LLC has a history of working with USAID and other government agencies on monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) projects. Their portfolio often includes work in international development, focusing on data collection, analysis, and program support across various sectors and geographic regions. Examining their past performance on similar-sized contracts, particularly those with USAID, would reveal their ability to manage complex projects, deliver quality results, and adhere to budgetary and timeline constraints. Past performance reviews and contract close-out data would provide insights into their reliability and effectiveness as a contractor in the federal space.

How does the cost structure (CPFF) compare to other contract types for similar MEL services?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common for services where the scope is not precisely defined at the outset or is expected to evolve, such as research and development or complex technical services like MEL. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility but carries a higher risk of cost growth if not managed diligently, as the government bears the cost risk. However, it can be more appropriate than FFP when the scope is inherently uncertain. Other types like Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) could offer better value by incentivizing performance, while Time and Materials (T&M) might be used for smaller, less defined tasks. The choice of CPFF suggests USAID prioritized flexibility and the ability to adapt the MEL program's activities over strict cost certainty.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically associated with USAID MEL contracts?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for USAID MEL contracts are designed to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of development programs. Common KPIs include the accuracy and timeliness of data collection, the quality of analytical reports, the utility of findings for program adaptation, and the achievement of specific evaluation objectives (e.g., assessing impact, identifying lessons learned). For this contract, KPIs would likely focus on the quality and usability of monitoring data, the rigor of evaluations conducted, the effectiveness of learning mechanisms to inform program adjustments, and the contractor's adherence to reporting schedules and standards. USAID's Performance Management Plan (PMP) and specific task orders would detail these KPIs.

What is the historical spending trend for MEL services by USAID in Uganda?

Historical spending trends for MEL services by USAID in Uganda would likely show a consistent investment in these areas, reflecting the agency's commitment to evidence-based programming and accountability. While specific figures for Uganda are not provided, USAID globally allocates significant resources to MEL to ensure development objectives are met effectively. Spending in this category can fluctuate based on the number and scale of active programs, shifts in strategic priorities, and the availability of funding. Analyzing past USAID budgets and contract awards for Uganda would reveal patterns in MEL investment, potentially indicating an increasing or stable demand for such services over time.

What are the risks associated with a long-duration contract (over 5 years) for technical services?

Long-duration contracts, like this one spanning over five years, present several risks. Firstly, there's the risk of contractor performance degradation over time, known as 'contractor complacency,' where motivation may wane. Secondly, the fixed fee, established at the beginning, might become misaligned with actual costs or market rates by the end of the period, potentially leading to the government overpaying or the contractor under-resourcing. Thirdly, technological advancements or changes in program needs could render the contractor's approach or expertise outdated, requiring costly modifications or contract renegotiations. Finally, long-term reliance on a single contractor can stifle innovation and reduce competitive pressure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 12

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1250 EYE ST NW STE 1100, WASHINGTON, DC, 20005

Business Categories: Category Business, Community Developed Corporation Owned Firm, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,869,060

Exercised Options: $19,869,060

Current Obligation: $19,769,956

Actual Outlays: $41,938

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline