USAID's $401M Consulting Contract with Louis Berger Group Faces Scrutiny for Non-Competitive Award

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $401,239,551 ($401.2M)

Contractor: THE Louis Berger Group, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2007-09-26

End Date: 2013-12-31

Contract Duration: 2,288 days

Daily Burn Rate: $175.4K/day

Competition Type: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: THIS MODIFICATION WAS DONE TO INCREMENTALLY FUND THE TASK ORDER TO FUND THE ACTIVITIES AT THE INITIAL STAGE

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $401.2 million to THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC. for work described as: THIS MODIFICATION WAS DONE TO INCREMENTALLY FUND THE TASK ORDER TO FUND THE ACTIVITIES AT THE INITIAL STAGE Key points: 1. Significant contract value raises questions about cost-effectiveness and oversight. 2. Non-competitive award limits price discovery and potentially inflates costs. 3. Long contract duration (2007-2013) suggests potential for scope creep and evolving needs. 4. Consulting services sector is prone to cost overruns if not managed tightly.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of over $401 million is substantial for management consulting services. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to assess if this price reflects fair market value or if it's inflated due to the lack of competition.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

This was awarded as a non-competitive delivery order, meaning only one vendor was solicited. This significantly limits price discovery and competition, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition in awarding this large contract raises concerns about whether taxpayers received the best possible value for the services rendered.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have overpaid due to the absence of competitive bidding. The long duration of the contract could indicate a lack of clear initial scope or ongoing, potentially unnecessary, services. Transparency in the justification for a non-competitive award is crucial for public trust.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Non-competitive award
  • High contract value
  • Long contract duration

Positive Signals

  • Incremental funding suggests phased approach to activities

Sector Analysis

Management consulting services, particularly for government agencies like USAID, can range widely in cost. Benchmarks are difficult without specific service details, but large, long-term, non-competitive contracts warrant close examination for efficiency.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. The non-competitive nature likely excluded them from consideration.

Oversight & Accountability

The non-competitive nature of this award raises significant oversight questions. It is essential to understand the justification for bypassing competition and to ensure robust monitoring of contract performance and costs.

Related Government Programs

  • Other Management Consulting Services
  • Agency for International Development Contracting
  • Agency for International Development Programs

Risk Flags

  • Lack of competition
  • Potential for cost overruns
  • Limited transparency on justification
  • Difficulty in assessing value for money

Tags

other-management-consulting-services, agency-for-international-development, delivery-order, 100m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $401.2 million to THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC.. THIS MODIFICATION WAS DONE TO INCREMENTALLY FUND THE TASK ORDER TO FUND THE ACTIVITIES AT THE INITIAL STAGE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, 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 $401.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-26. End: 2013-12-31.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a non-competitive basis, and were alternative competitive strategies considered?

The provided data states the modification was to incrementally fund the task order for initial stage activities. However, the initial award justification for non-competition is missing. Typically, non-competitive awards require a strong justification, such as unique capabilities or urgent needs. Without this, it's difficult to assess if taxpayer funds were used efficiently or if a competitive process could have yielded better results or lower costs.

How was the 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' structure managed to ensure cost control and prevent overruns, especially given the lack of competition?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts can incentivize contractors to control costs to maximize their fixed fee. However, without competition, the baseline cost estimates are critical. Robust oversight from USAID would be necessary to scrutinize incurred costs, ensure they are reasonable and allocable, and verify that the fixed fee remains appropriate throughout the contract's life, preventing potential cost inflation.

What performance metrics and deliverables were established to measure the effectiveness and value of the 'Other Management Consulting Services' provided over the contract's duration?

The effectiveness of consulting services is typically measured against predefined deliverables and performance metrics tied to the agency's objectives. For a contract of this magnitude and duration, clear milestones, quality standards, and impact assessments should have been in place. The absence of this information makes it challenging to evaluate the actual value delivered to USAID and the taxpayers.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesOther Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTDEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Louis Berger Hawthorne Services Inc. (UEI: 203698522)

Address: 100 HALSTED ST, EAST ORANGE, NJ, 07018

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,078,515,641

Exercised Options: $2,078,515,641

Current Obligation: $401,239,551

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: AID650I000600010

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2007-09-26

Current End Date: 2013-12-31

Potential End Date: 2013-12-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-05-28

More Contracts from THE Louis Berger Group, Inc.

View all THE Louis Berger Group, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Agency for International Development Contracts

View all Agency for International Development contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending