Department of Education's $13.1M contract for administrative data improvement shows fair value with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,131,026 ($13.1M)

Contractor: Council of Chief State School Officers, Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Education

Start Date: 2006-09-29

End Date: 2011-12-20

Contract Duration: 1,908 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.9K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ADMINISTRATIVE DATA IMPROVEMENT

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20202

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Education obligated $13.1 million to COUNCIL OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS, INCORPORATED for work described as: ADMINISTRATIVE DATA IMPROVEMENT Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar services, though specific cost drivers are not fully transparent. 2. Limited competition may have influenced pricing, suggesting potential for better value through broader solicitation. 3. The contract duration of 1908 days (over 5 years) indicates a long-term need for these administrative data services. 4. Performance context is limited, but the award type suggests a focus on achieving specific outcomes. 5. This contract falls within the broader 'Educational Support Services' sector, contributing to the government's data management capabilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this $13.1 million contract against similar administrative data improvement services suggests a fair, though not exceptional, value. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for performance-based incentives, but without detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Compared to other government contracts for data management and educational support, the pricing appears within a typical range, but the lack of robust competition limits the ability to definitively state it represents the best possible price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, but the specific details regarding the number of bidders and the nature of the competition are not fully elaborated in the provided data. A 'limited' competition suggests that while multiple entities were potentially considered, the pool might not have been as broad as a full and open solicitation. This can sometimes lead to less aggressive pricing compared to scenarios with numerous, highly competitive bids.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can mean taxpayers may not have benefited from the lowest possible prices that a wider bidding process might have yielded.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Education and potentially state and local educational agencies that rely on improved administrative data. The services delivered focus on enhancing the collection, management, and utilization of administrative data within the education sector. The geographic impact is national, supporting federal oversight and data-driven policy decisions across the United States. Workforce implications may include roles in data analysis, IT support, and program management within the contractor's organization and potentially within the Department of Education.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed cost breakdowns makes it difficult to fully assess cost-effectiveness.
Limited competition may have resulted in a higher price than a fully open solicitation.
The long contract duration could pose risks if technology or needs change significantly.

Positive Signals

The Cost Plus Award Fee structure incentivizes contractor performance.
The contract addresses a critical need for administrative data improvement in education.
Awarded to a known entity (Council of Chief State School Officers) suggests some level of established capability.

Sector Analysis

This contract operates within the broader Information Technology and Educational Support Services sector. The market for administrative data improvement is significant, driven by government mandates for efficiency, accountability, and data-driven decision-making. Comparable spending benchmarks in this area are often tied to IT modernization, data analytics platforms, and specialized consulting services. The Department of Education's investment aligns with a general trend across federal agencies to leverage data for better program management and policy development.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The primary contractor, Council of Chief State School Officers, Incorporated, is an established organization, and its role in subcontracting would depend on its internal policies and the nature of the work performed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Education's contracting and program management offices. As a delivery order under a larger contract, specific oversight mechanisms would be detailed in the contract itself. Transparency is moderate, with basic award data available, but detailed performance metrics and cost justifications are not publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Education Data Systems
Educational Technology Grants
Government IT Modernization Programs
Data Analytics Services for Government

Risk Flags

Potential for cost creep due to CPAF structure if not tightly managed.
Risk of technological obsolescence over the contract's long duration.
Limited competition may have led to suboptimal pricing.
Dependence on contractor performance for critical data functions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Education awarded $13.1 million to COUNCIL OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS, INCORPORATED. ADMINISTRATIVE DATA IMPROVEMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COUNCIL OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS, INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Education (Department of Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-29. End: 2011-12-20.

What is the track record of the Council of Chief State School Officers, Incorporated with federal contracts, particularly in data improvement?

The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) is a non-profit organization representing state chiefs for K-12 education. While primarily known for policy and advocacy, they do engage in federal contracts and grants related to education data and improvement initiatives. Their track record often involves collaborative projects with states and the Department of Education. Specific performance details on this particular $13.1 million contract, such as on-time delivery, quality of service, and adherence to budget, would typically be found in internal Department of Education performance reviews or contract close-out reports, which are not publicly detailed here. However, their long-standing presence in the education sector suggests a foundational understanding of the domain.

How does the $13.1 million cost compare to similar administrative data improvement contracts within the Department of Education or other federal agencies?

Benchmarking this $13.1 million contract requires comparing it to similar services, such as data system development, data analysis, and administrative process improvement within the education sector or related government functions. Contracts of this magnitude for multi-year data initiatives are not uncommon. For instance, IT modernization projects or large-scale data analytics procurements can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, used here, is typical for services where performance outcomes are key but difficult to define precisely upfront. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns and specific service deliverables, a precise comparison is difficult, but the overall value appears fair given the duration and scope implied by the award amount.

What are the primary risks associated with a contract of this duration (1908 days) for administrative data improvement?

A contract spanning over five years for administrative data improvement carries several inherent risks. Firstly, technological obsolescence is a significant concern; data management technologies and best practices evolve rapidly, and a system implemented early in the contract might be outdated by its end. Secondly, the scope of work could become misaligned with the Department's evolving strategic priorities or federal regulations. Thirdly, contractor performance could degrade over time, or key personnel might depart, impacting service continuity. Finally, cost overruns are always a risk, especially with Cost Plus Award Fee contracts if performance targets are not met or if unforeseen complexities arise, although the award fee mechanism is intended to mitigate this by incentivizing efficiency and effectiveness.

What does the 'limited' competition level imply for the effectiveness and efficiency of this contract?

A 'limited' competition suggests that the solicitation process may not have been fully open to all potential bidders, possibly due to specific requirements, pre-qualification, or a restricted solicitation list. This can imply that the pool of qualified vendors was smaller than in a 'full and open' competition. While it might ensure a certain level of expertise, it can also lead to less competitive pricing, as vendors may face reduced pressure to offer the lowest possible cost. For taxpayers, this could mean a potentially higher price than might have been achieved through broader competition. However, if the limited pool consisted of highly specialized and capable firms, the effectiveness of the service delivery might still be high, provided the award fee structure adequately incentivizes performance.

How has federal spending on 'Educational Support Services' (NAICS 611710) evolved, and where does this contract fit in?

Federal spending within the 'Educational Support Services' category (NAICS 611710) has generally seen consistent investment, reflecting the government's commitment to education at all levels. This sector encompasses a range of services, including educational testing, data processing, curriculum development, and administrative support for educational institutions. This specific $13.1 million contract for administrative data improvement fits squarely within this category, addressing the critical need for efficient and effective data management to support educational programs and policy. Analyzing historical spending trends in this NAICS code can reveal patterns in federal priorities, technological adoption, and the increasing emphasis on data analytics within the education domain.

What is the significance of the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type for this administrative data improvement effort?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type is significant because it aims to balance cost control with performance incentives. In this structure, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs, plus a base fee that is a percentage of the estimated cost. Crucially, an additional 'award fee' is paid based on the government's determination of how well the contractor met or exceeded specific performance objectives. For administrative data improvement, where outcomes can be complex and evolving, CPAF allows the government to incentivize high-quality service delivery, innovation, and efficiency beyond basic contract requirements. It encourages the contractor to proactively identify and solve problems to earn the maximum award fee, aligning contractor and government interests.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Educational Support Services › Educational Support Services

Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 98

Business Categories: Category Business, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,595,040

Exercised Options: $13,737,759

Current Obligation: $13,131,026

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: ED06CO0056

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline