EPA's $14M Technology Transfer Support contract awarded to Scientific Consulting Group Inc. for environmental consulting

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,076,683 ($14.1M)

Contractor: Scientific Consulting Group Inc

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2008-12-16

End Date: 2014-11-30

Contract Duration: 2,175 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: GAITHERSBURG, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20878

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $14.1 million to SCIENTIFIC CONSULTING GROUP INC for work described as: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value of $14.1 million over six years suggests a moderate annual spend. 2. Awarded via full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. Performance period of nearly six years allows for sustained support but requires ongoing oversight. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541620 points to specialized environmental consulting services. 6. The contract was awarded to a single entity, Scientific Consulting Group Inc., highlighting their specialized expertise.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $14.1 million over approximately six years averages around $2.35 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar technology transfer support contracts is challenging without more specific data on the scope of services. However, the fixed fee component suggests a degree of cost predictability for the government, provided the scope of work remains stable. The cost-plus nature, while allowing flexibility, necessitates diligent oversight to ensure value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' which implies that while the competition was open, specific sources may have been excluded based on predefined criteria. The presence of four bidders indicates a reasonable level of competition, which generally aids in price discovery and achieving fair market value. The specific reasons for excluding certain sources would be critical to fully understanding the competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: The open competition, despite potential exclusions, suggests that taxpayers benefited from a process designed to solicit multiple offers, likely leading to a more competitive price than a sole-source award.

Public Impact

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) benefits from enhanced technology transfer capabilities. Services delivered likely support the dissemination and adoption of environmental technologies. The contract's impact is national, supporting the EPA's mission across the United States. Workforce implications may include specialized scientific and consulting roles within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost creep due to the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type if scope is not tightly managed.
The 'after exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type warrants further investigation into the rationale for exclusions.
Long contract duration requires sustained government oversight to ensure continued alignment with EPA objectives.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process.
The contract supports a critical government function: technology transfer for environmental solutions.
The contractor, Scientific Consulting Group Inc., has secured a significant contract, suggesting a level of trust and capability.

Sector Analysis

The environmental consulting services sector is a significant market driven by regulatory compliance, technological innovation, and sustainability initiatives. This contract fits within the broader IT and Professional Services categories, specifically focusing on specialized scientific and technical consulting. The EPA's spending in this area supports its mandate to protect human health and the environment through research, policy, and enforcement. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific nature of technology transfer support, but the $14.1 million over six years represents a substantial, long-term investment.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside (SS is false, SB is false). Therefore, the primary contractor, Scientific Consulting Group Inc., is likely a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though large prime contracts can sometimes lead to subcontracting opportunities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracting officers and program managers. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, rigorous financial oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures against the fixed fee and ensure costs are reasonable and allocable. Transparency is facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms. The EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) would have jurisdiction to investigate potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

EPA Research and Development Contracts
Environmental Technology Development Programs
Federal Technology Transfer Initiatives
Scientific and Technical Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Cost Overrun Risk (CPFF)
Scope Creep Potential
Justification for Excluded Sources Needs Review

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $14.1 million to SCIENTIFIC CONSULTING GROUP INC. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENTIFIC CONSULTING GROUP INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-12-16. End: 2014-11-30.

What specific technologies or research areas does this contract focus on for transfer?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SUPPORT' under NAICS code '541620' (Environmental Consulting Services). While the specific technologies are not detailed, the context suggests the support likely involves facilitating the movement of EPA-funded research and innovations into the commercial sector or other government agencies. This could encompass areas like pollution control, sustainable materials, climate change mitigation technologies, or environmental monitoring systems. The contractor's role might include market analysis, intellectual property management, partnership development, and outreach to potential licensees or collaborators.

How does the $14.1 million total value compare to similar EPA technology transfer contracts?

Direct comparison of the $14.1 million total value is difficult without access to a comprehensive database of all EPA technology transfer contracts, including their specific scopes of work and durations. However, a six-year contract duration with a total value of $14.1 million implies an average annual value of approximately $2.35 million. This suggests a significant, ongoing effort rather than a short-term project. Larger EPA initiatives or contracts supporting broad research portfolios might exceed this value, while smaller, more focused efforts could be less. The value indicates a substantial commitment to facilitating the application of environmental science.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, for a technology transfer support contract, typical KPIs might include the number of technologies successfully licensed, the number of new partnerships formed, the amount of non-federal funding leveraged for technology development, the number of patents filed or issued resulting from supported research, or the successful commercialization of transferred technologies. The EPA would likely establish specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals within the contract's statement of work to track progress.

What is the track record of Scientific Consulting Group Inc. with EPA or similar technology transfer contracts?

The award of a $14.1 million contract by the EPA to Scientific Consulting Group Inc. suggests a positive track record or strong qualifications relevant to environmental consulting and technology transfer. Without access to detailed past performance evaluations or a history of their contract awards, it's difficult to provide a comprehensive assessment. However, securing a multi-year, full-and-open competition contract implies they met the agency's requirements and demonstrated capability. Further investigation into their past performance on similar government contracts would provide deeper insights.

What risks are associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this technology transfer support?

The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for technology transfer support is the potential for cost overruns. While the contractor is incentivized to control costs to protect their fixed fee, the government bears the risk of increased costs if the contractor's actual expenses exceed estimates. This necessitates robust government oversight to ensure that all costs incurred are reasonable, allocable, and allowable. Scope creep is another significant risk; if the definition of 'technology transfer support' expands without formal modification, costs can escalate. Effective management requires clear definition of tasks and diligent monitoring of expenditures.

How does the 'after exclusion of sources' competition type impact potential value for taxpayers?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' clause introduces a nuance to the competitive landscape. While 'full and open' implies broad solicitation, the 'exclusion of sources' means certain potential bidders were not considered. The impact on taxpayers depends heavily on the justification for these exclusions. If exclusions were based on objective criteria related to specialized capabilities essential for the task, it might ensure a higher quality of service, potentially leading to better outcomes in technology transfer. However, if exclusions were arbitrary or overly restrictive, it could limit competition, potentially leading to higher prices or less innovative solutions than a truly unrestricted open competition might yield.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Environmental Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: PRCI0611297

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 656 QUINCE ORCHARD RD, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20878

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,628,116

Exercised Options: $15,448,270

Current Obligation: $14,076,683

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline