Foreign Assistance Program contract awarded $200.9M for professional services, but competition details remain undisclosed

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $200,884,587 ($200.9M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2005-09-28

End Date: 2009-02-28

Contract Duration: 1,249 days

Daily Burn Rate: $160.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $200.9 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Key points: 1. Value for money is difficult to assess due to undisclosed domestic awardees and lack of detailed performance metrics. 2. Competition dynamics are limited as the contract was not competed, raising questions about price discovery. 3. Risk indicators include the lack of transparency in awardee selection and the extended performance period. 4. Performance context is broad, covering 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services,' making specific outcomes hard to track. 5. Sector positioning is within professional services, a broad category often supporting various government functions.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total award of $200.9 million for 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' is substantial. However, without knowing the specific domestic awardees or the detailed scope of work, it is challenging to benchmark this against similar contracts or assess the value for money. The fixed-price contract type suggests a defined scope, but the lack of competition and transparency in selection makes a definitive value assessment difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a 'NOT COMPETED' basis, indicating a sole-source or limited competition procurement. The specific justification for not competing the award is not provided in the data. The lack of open competition means that potential efficiencies and cost savings that might arise from a competitive bidding process were likely not realized.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure to drive down costs. The lack of transparency in the award process also limits accountability.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the undisclosed domestic awardees who received significant funding. The services delivered fall under a broad category of professional, scientific, and technical services, likely supporting various Agency for International Development (USAID) initiatives. The geographic impact is not specified but is likely tied to the operational areas of USAID's foreign assistance programs. Workforce implications would involve employment opportunities within the selected domestic firms.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition limits price discovery and potentially inflates costs for taxpayers.
Undisclosed awardees obscure accountability and make it difficult to assess contractor performance or conflicts of interest.
Broad service category ('All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services') hinders specific performance evaluation.
Extended contract duration (1249 days) increases the risk of scope creep or evolving needs not being optimally met without re-competition.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded by the Agency for International Development, a key agency for foreign policy and development.
The fixed-price contract type can provide cost certainty if the scope is well-defined.
The award represents a significant investment in professional services supporting government functions.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the broad professional, scientific, and technical services sector. This sector is characterized by a wide range of specialized expertise, from research and development to consulting and administrative support. Government spending in this area is substantial, supporting various agency missions. Benchmarking is difficult without more specific service details, but overall federal spending on professional services is in the hundreds of billions annually.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside criterion for this contract. Therefore, it is unlikely that small businesses were prioritized or directly benefited from this award. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses are not detailed, but given the lack of competition and the nature of the services, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. Given the 'NOT COMPETED' status and undisclosed awardees, transparency assessment is limited. Accountability would typically be managed through contract performance reviews and reporting requirements by the Agency for International Development, but the specifics are unknown. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply, but the effectiveness of oversight is hampered by the lack of public information.

Related Government Programs

Foreign Aid Programs
Professional and Technical Services Contracts
Agency for International Development Contracts
Federal Service Contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Undisclosed Awardees
Broad Service Category
Lack of Transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $200.9 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

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 $200.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-09-28. End: 2009-02-28.

What specific services were rendered under this $200.9 million contract?

The contract data classifies the services under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541990, which broadly covers 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services.' This is a catch-all category that can include a vast array of activities, such as research, consulting, testing, and specialized technical support. Without further details from the awarding agency (Agency for International Development), it is impossible to ascertain the precise nature of the services provided. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to evaluate the contract's effectiveness or relevance to specific foreign assistance goals.

Why was this contract not competed, and what was the justification?

The provided data explicitly states 'CT: NOT COMPETED,' indicating that the Agency for International Development (USAID) did not conduct a competitive bidding process for this contract. The specific justification for this decision, such as the existence of a sole responsible source, urgent need, or other exceptions to full and open competition, is not included in the data. Awarding contracts on a non-competitive basis typically requires a documented justification that must meet strict federal acquisition regulations. The absence of this justification in the available data raises concerns about the procurement process and potential missed opportunities for cost savings through competition.

Who are the 'DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' and what is their track record?

The data lists 'DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' as the recipients of the $200.9 million award. This signifies that the specific entities awarded the contract are not publicly disclosed in this dataset. Consequently, their track record, past performance, relevant experience, and any potential conflicts of interest cannot be assessed. This lack of transparency is a significant drawback, as it prevents scrutiny of the contractors' qualifications and reliability, which are crucial factors in evaluating the overall risk and value of a federal contract.

How does the $200.9 million spending compare to similar foreign assistance contracts?

Comparing this $200.9 million contract to similar foreign assistance contracts is challenging due to the broad classification of services ('All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services') and the undisclosed awardees. Foreign assistance spending can vary widely depending on the program's objectives, duration, and scope. However, $200.9 million represents a substantial investment. To provide a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify contracts with similar objectives (e.g., technical support for development programs) and similar service categories awarded over comparable timeframes. Without more granular data on the specific activities funded and the contractors involved, a precise benchmark is not feasible.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract's structure and lack of transparency?

The primary risks associated with this contract stem from its non-competitive award and the undisclosed nature of the awardees. The lack of competition increases the risk of paying inflated prices, as there was no market pressure to ensure cost-effectiveness. The undisclosed awardees obscure accountability, making it difficult to monitor performance, ensure compliance, or identify potential conflicts of interest. Furthermore, the broad service category limits the ability to assess whether the funds were used effectively to achieve specific foreign assistance goals. The extended duration also poses a risk of the contract becoming outdated or misaligned with evolving needs without opportunities for reassessment through competition.

What is the historical spending pattern for 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' by the Agency for International Development?

Historical spending patterns for 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' (NAICS 541990) by the Agency for International Development (USAID) would require a comprehensive analysis of past contract awards. This specific contract, awarded between September 2005 and February 2009 for $200.9 million, represents a significant portion of spending within this category during that period. To understand broader trends, one would need to examine USAID's contracting data over multiple fiscal years, identifying the total amounts obligated for NAICS 541990, the number of contracts awarded, and whether they were competed or sole-sourced. This analysis would reveal if this particular award was an anomaly or indicative of a consistent reliance on this broad service category.

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: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $683,083,639

Exercised Options: $563,434,576

Current Obligation: $200,884,587

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: AIDGEGI000400004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline