DoD's $19.8M travel contract with CW Government Travel Inc. awarded in 2003 for services through 2007

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,852,153 ($19.9M)

Contractor: Carlson Travel Group, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-02-07

End Date: 2007-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,061 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200306!000044!2100!MT01 !HQ, MTMC !DAMT0102C0025 !A!N! !Y!P00005 !20030207!20030930!043844984!007873433!602513673!N!CW GOVERNMENT TRAVEL INC !1777 NE LOOP 410 !SAN ANTONIO !MN!78217!65000!029!48!SAN ANTONIO !BEXAR !TEXAS !+000000830000!N!N!000000000000!V302!TRAVEL AGENT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !561510!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!003!B! !C!N!Z! ! !Y!C!N! ! ! !C!C!A!A!000!A!A!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR County, TEXAS, 78217

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.9 million to CARLSON TRAVEL GROUP, INC for work described as: 200306!000044!2100!MT01 !HQ, MTMC !DAMT0102C0025 !A!N! !Y!P00005 !20030207!20030930!043844984!007873433!602513673!N!CW GOVERNMENT TRAVEL INC !1777 NE LOOP 410 !SAN ANTONIO !MN!78217!65000!029!48!SAN ANTONIO !BEXAR… Key points: 1. Contract value of $19.8M over its period of performance. 2. Awarded by the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Army. 3. Contract type was Full and Open Competition. 4. Services provided were Travel Agent Services. 5. The contract was a Firm Fixed Price type. 6. The period of performance spanned from February 2002 to September 2007.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $19.8 million over approximately 5.5 years suggests an average annual spend of around $3.6 million. Without specific details on the volume of travel booked or the complexity of services, it's challenging to benchmark the value precisely. However, for government-wide travel contracts, this amount falls within a moderate range. The firm fixed price structure implies that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the services were delivered as expected.

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. The data shows there were 3 bidders for this contract. A competitive environment with multiple bidders generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government, as contractors vie for the award.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition suggests that taxpayers benefited from a potentially lower price due to the competitive bidding process, rather than a sole-source award which might have incurred higher costs.

Public Impact

Military personnel and civilian employees of the Department of Defense likely benefited from streamlined travel arrangements. The contract facilitated the booking and management of travel services, essential for mission readiness and personnel deployment. The geographic impact is national, supporting DoD travel needs across various locations. Workforce implications include support for administrative and travel agent roles within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for price creep if not closely monitored despite fixed-price structure.
Dependence on a single contractor for a significant period could limit flexibility.
Ensuring consistent service quality across all travel booked under the contract.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
Firm Fixed Price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Longer contract duration can provide stability and predictable service delivery.

Sector Analysis

The travel services sector for government contracts is a significant market. This contract falls under the broader category of professional services, specifically focusing on travel management. Government travel spending is substantial, and contracts like this aim to consolidate and manage these expenditures efficiently. Benchmarking against other government travel contracts would require data on the volume of travelers, destinations, and specific service requirements.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'N' for small business. The primary contractor, CW Government Travel Inc., is likely a larger entity. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within the provided data, so the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is not discernible from this record alone.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and financial management offices. The firm fixed price nature provides some inherent accountability. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

GSA SmartPay Travel Card Program
DoD Travel System (DTS)
Other Government Travel Agency Contracts

Risk Flags

Contract duration is relatively long (over 5 years), requiring sustained performance monitoring.
Firm Fixed Price contracts can sometimes lead to contractor complacency if not actively managed.
Travel services are sensitive to policy changes and economic conditions, potentially impacting usage.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.9 million to CARLSON TRAVEL GROUP, INC. 200306!000044!2100!MT01 !HQ, MTMC !DAMT0102C0025 !A!N! !Y!P00005 !20030207!20030930!043844984!007873433!602513673!N!CW GOVERNMENT TRAVEL INC !1777 NE LOOP 410 !SAN ANTONIO !MN!78217!65000!029!48!SAN ANTONIO !BEXAR !TEXAS !+000000830000!N!N!000000000000!V302!TRAVEL AGENT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !561510!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CARLSON TRAVEL GROUP, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-02-07. End: 2007-09-30.

What was the specific nature of the travel agent services provided under this contract?

The contract data indicates the primary service was 'TRAVEL AGENT SERVICES' under Product Service Code (PSC) 561510. This typically encompasses booking airline tickets, hotel accommodations, rental cars, and other travel-related arrangements for government personnel. It also includes itinerary management, travel policy compliance, and potentially reporting on travel expenditures. The specific details of the service level agreements (SLAs) and the scope of support would be elaborated in the contract's statement of work (SOW), which is not provided in this data snippet.

How does the $19.8 million contract value compare to other similar government travel contracts awarded around the same period?

The $19.8 million total contract value over approximately 5.5 years (February 2002 to September 2007) translates to an average annual value of roughly $3.6 million. This figure is moderate within the context of large federal travel contracts. For instance, larger enterprise-wide travel management contracts, especially those covering multiple agencies or a very high volume of travelers, could easily reach tens or hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Smaller, more localized contracts might be in the hundreds of thousands. Without knowing the specific volume of travelers or the scope of services (e.g., domestic vs. international, leisure vs. official duty), a precise comparison is difficult, but this contract appears to be a significant, though not exceptionally large, award for a specific agency or set of requirements.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the contractor's performance?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate CW Government Travel Inc.'s performance. However, typical KPIs for travel agent services contracts include metrics such as on-time booking rates, adherence to travel policy, customer satisfaction scores (from travelers), accuracy of reservations, and cost savings achieved through preferred vendor usage or negotiated rates. The firm fixed price nature of the contract implies that meeting the defined service requirements within the agreed-upon price was paramount. Performance would likely be assessed through regular reporting, traveler feedback mechanisms, and potentially audits.

Were there any notable issues or challenges reported regarding this contract during its performance period?

The available data does not contain specific details about reported issues or challenges encountered during the performance of this contract. Standard contract administration processes within the Department of the Army would involve monitoring performance, addressing any discrepancies, and potentially issuing contract modifications or exercising corrective actions if necessary. Without access to contract performance reports, inspection reports, or dispute logs, it's impossible to identify any specific problems that may have arisen. The fact that the contract was awarded and completed without apparent major disruptions (based on available summary data) suggests that performance was likely adequate.

What is the historical spending trend for travel agent services within the Department of the Army around the time of this contract?

The provided data focuses on a single contract award and does not offer historical spending trends for the Department of the Army's travel agent services. To analyze historical spending, one would need to examine contract awards over multiple fiscal years, looking at the total obligated amounts for relevant Product Service Codes (like 561510) awarded by the Army. This would reveal whether spending on such services was increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable. Factors influencing these trends could include changes in military deployment tempos, civilian workforce size, travel policies, and the adoption of new technologies or consolidated travel management solutions.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Nonscheduled Air Transportation › Other Nonscheduled Air Transportation

Product/Service Code: TRANSPORT, TRAVEL, RELOCATION › RELOCATION OR TRAVEL AGENT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 701 CARLSON PKWY, MINNETONKA, MN, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline