HHS awarded $21.8M for logistics consulting, with CRP, Inc. delivering services over 6 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,867,344 ($21.9M)

Contractor: CRP, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2004-09-30

End Date: 2010-09-29

Contract Duration: 2,190 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.0K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: CCSAP CAPT LOGISTICS

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20008

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $21.9 million to CRP, INC. for work described as: CCSAP CAPT LOGISTICS Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the extended duration and cost-plus award fee structure, which can incentivize performance but also carries cost overrun risk. 2. Competition dynamics were favorable, with a competitive delivery order indicating multiple bidders vied for this task. 3. Risk indicators include the cost-plus award fee pricing model, which requires careful monitoring to ensure cost control. 4. Performance context shows a long-term engagement for essential logistics support, suggesting a sustained need. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the professional services category, supporting critical government operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value is assessed against its 6-year duration and the nature of logistics consulting services. While the total award amount is substantial, the cost-plus award fee structure allows for flexibility and performance incentives. Benchmarking against similar long-term, complex consulting engagements suggests the pricing is within a reasonable range, though the final cost is subject to actual expenses and performance. The lack of a fixed price makes direct value-for-money comparison challenging without detailed cost breakdowns.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that it was competed under a broader contract vehicle that allowed for full and open competition. The presence of multiple bidders (indicated by 'no': 5) suggests a healthy level of competition for this specific task order. This competitive process is expected to drive more favorable pricing and service quality compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best value for public funds. The multiple bids likely resulted in a more cost-effective solution for the government's logistics consulting needs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requiring expert logistics and distribution support. Services delivered include process, physical distribution, and logistics consulting, aimed at optimizing supply chains and operational efficiency. The geographic impact is centered in the District of Columbia, where the contractor is based and likely performs much of its oversight and coordination. Workforce implications may involve the utilization of specialized consulting talent, potentially creating demand for experienced logistics professionals.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus award fee contracts can lead to higher final costs if not managed diligently.
The long duration of the contract increases the risk of scope creep or evolving requirements not being adequately addressed.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical logistics consulting over an extended period could pose a risk if performance degrades.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
The contract's duration indicates a sustained need and potentially successful past performance.
The nature of consulting services implies the transfer of specialized knowledge and best practices to the agency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on logistics consulting. This sector is crucial for government operations, enabling efficient management of resources and supply chains. Comparable spending in this area often involves significant investments in optimizing complex distribution networks, particularly for agencies like HHS that manage vast amounts of supplies and data. The market size for logistics consulting is substantial, with numerous firms competing for government contracts.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there information suggesting significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The contractor, CRP, Inc., is not explicitly identified as a small business. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears limited for this particular award, though larger prime contractors often engage small businesses for specialized support.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) or its parent agency, HHS. Accountability measures are embedded in the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, which links payment to performance. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases, though detailed performance reports and cost breakdowns may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

HHS Logistics Support Contracts
Federal Management Consulting Services
Supply Chain Management Services
Government IT and Operations Support

Risk Flags

Cost-Plus Award Fee structure requires diligent oversight to control costs.
Long contract duration may lead to outdated requirements or contractor complacency.
Performance metrics for award fee need to be clearly defined and measurable.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $21.9 million to CRP, INC.. CCSAP CAPT LOGISTICS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CRP, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $21.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-09-30. End: 2010-09-29.

What is the track record of CRP, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly within HHS?

CRP, Inc. has a history of performing federal contracts, including those with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Analyzing their past performance data, such as contract close-outs, modifications, and any reported issues or awards, provides insight into their reliability and capability. For this specific contract, the 6-year duration suggests a sustained relationship and likely satisfactory performance to warrant such an extended engagement. However, a deeper dive into specific performance metrics, past audit findings, or any disputes would offer a more comprehensive understanding of their track record beyond the basic award data.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure compare to other pricing models for similar logistics consulting services?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) model is often used for complex services where performance outcomes are difficult to define precisely upfront or where innovation is encouraged. Unlike fixed-price contracts, CPAF reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a base amount and an award amount, contingent on meeting or exceeding performance targets. Compared to Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), CPAF offers stronger incentives for high performance. However, it carries a higher risk of cost escalation than fixed-price contracts if performance targets are not well-defined or if oversight is lax. For logistics consulting, CPAF can be effective in driving efficiency and innovation, but requires robust government oversight to manage costs.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically used to evaluate logistics consulting services under a CPAF contract?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for logistics consulting under a CPAF contract are tailored to the specific objectives of the engagement. Common KPIs might include improvements in delivery times, reduction in shipping costs, enhanced inventory accuracy, successful implementation of new logistics software or processes, and overall client satisfaction scores from internal agency stakeholders. For this contract with HHS, KPIs could also relate to the efficiency of distribution for medical supplies or the optimization of data management within the supply chain. The 'award fee' portion of the contract is directly tied to the achievement of these pre-defined KPIs, which are evaluated periodically by the government.

What is the historical spending trend for logistics consulting services within HHS or SAMHSA?

Analyzing historical spending trends for logistics consulting within HHS or SAMHSA reveals the agency's investment patterns in optimizing its operational and supply chain functions. While specific data for this contract shows an award of approximately $21.8 million over six years, broader trends would indicate whether this represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of spending in this category. Such analysis helps contextualize the current contract's significance and identify potential shifts in agency priorities or reliance on external expertise for logistics management. Understanding these trends can also inform future budget allocations and procurement strategies.

What are the potential risks associated with a 6-year contract duration for consulting services?

A 6-year contract duration for consulting services presents several potential risks. Firstly, the rapidly evolving nature of technology and business practices means that the initial scope of work might become outdated before the contract ends, potentially leading to inefficiencies or the need for costly modifications. Secondly, long-term reliance on a single contractor can reduce the agency's internal expertise and create a dependency that is difficult to break. Thirdly, there's a risk of 'contractor complacency,' where performance may decline over time due to a lack of competitive pressure. Effective contract management, including regular reviews and potential re-competition or modification strategies, is crucial to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Process, Physical Distribution, and Logistics Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4201 CONNECTICUT AVE NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 98

Business Categories: Category Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,867,344

Exercised Options: $21,867,344

Current Obligation: $21,867,344

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 280020600

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline