DHS Coast Guard spent $12.5M on training instructors via a sole-source contract with Engility LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,467,359 ($12.5M)

Contractor: Engility LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2004-09-30

End Date: 2004-09-30

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: TRAINING INSTRUCTORS

Place of Performance

Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92121

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $12.5 million to ENGILITY LLC for work described as: TRAINING INSTRUCTORS Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential price overruns and lack of competitive pressure. 2. The duration of the contract is not specified, making it difficult to assess long-term value for money. 3. The use of a Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost escalation if not closely monitored. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 611430 indicates a focus on professional development training. 5. The contract was awarded to Engility LLC, whose track record and performance on similar contracts warrant further investigation. 6. The contract's value of $12.5 million is significant for professional development training, necessitating a thorough review of its necessity and effectiveness.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value for money is challenging without comparable sole-source contracts for similar training services. The Time and Materials pricing structure, coupled with a lack of competition, suggests a higher risk of inflated costs compared to fixed-price or competitively bid contracts. Further analysis would require detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics to ascertain if the $12.5 million expenditure yielded adequate returns in terms of improved personnel skills and operational readiness for the U.S. Coast Guard.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This typically occurs when only one vendor is capable of providing the required services, or in cases of urgent need. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to secure the best possible price and terms, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers do not benefit from the cost savings typically achieved through competitive bidding processes. This can result in a less efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

U.S. Coast Guard personnel are the primary beneficiaries, receiving professional and management development training. The services delivered are focused on enhancing the skills and capabilities of Coast Guard instructors. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the U.S. Coast Guard's operational areas, potentially nationwide. Workforce implications include the development of a more skilled and effective instructor cadre within the Coast Guard.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially increasing costs.
Time and Materials contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns without strict oversight.
Lack of specified contract duration makes long-term value assessment difficult.
Absence of detailed performance metrics hinders evaluation of training effectiveness.
Contractor's specific experience and past performance on similar sole-source training contracts are not detailed.

Positive Signals

Contract addresses a specific need for professional development training within the U.S. Coast Guard.
The training is intended to improve the capabilities of instructors, which can have a multiplier effect on workforce development.
The contract was awarded to Engility LLC, a known entity in government contracting, suggesting some level of established capability.

Sector Analysis

The professional and management development training sector is a significant component of the broader government services market. Contracts in this area often focus on enhancing workforce skills, leadership capabilities, and specialized operational knowledge. Spending benchmarks for training services can vary widely based on the complexity of the subject matter, the duration of the training, and the number of personnel involved. This $12.5 million contract for training instructors falls within the mid-to-high range for specialized professional development, especially considering its sole-source nature.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb fields) was not a factor in this contract, as both are false. There is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. This suggests that the contract was not structured to specifically benefit small businesses, and their role in fulfilling this requirement is likely minimal or non-existent.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. However, as a sole-source, Time and Materials contract, it would typically require rigorous oversight from the contracting officer and program managers to ensure that costs are reasonable and that the work performed aligns with the contract's objectives. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Professional Development Training
Instructor Training Programs
U.S. Coast Guard Training Services
Department of Homeland Security Training Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Time and Materials contract type
Lack of specified duration
No performance metrics provided

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $12.5 million to ENGILITY LLC. TRAINING INSTRUCTORS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENGILITY LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Coast Guard).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

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

What is the specific nature of the 'TRAINING INSTRUCTORS' services provided under this contract, and what are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure their effectiveness?

The provided data identifies the service category as 'Professional and Management Development Training' (NAICS 611430), indicating the training focuses on enhancing the professional and managerial skills of instructors within the U.S. Coast Guard. However, specific details regarding the curriculum, the types of instructors being trained (e.g., technical, leadership, safety), and the precise learning objectives are not available. Crucially, the data does not include any Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the effectiveness of the training delivered by Engility LLC. Without these KPIs, it is impossible to quantitatively assess whether the $12.5 million investment resulted in improved instructor performance, better training delivery to Coast Guard personnel, or enhanced operational readiness.

Can Engility LLC's past performance and track record on similar sole-source training contracts be assessed to justify the award decision?

The provided data does not contain information regarding Engility LLC's past performance or track record, particularly on similar sole-source training contracts. While Engility LLC is a known entity in government contracting, the justification for awarding this $12.5 million contract on a sole-source basis without a competitive process hinges on demonstrating that Engility was uniquely qualified or that no other vendor could meet the requirement. Without access to performance evaluations, past project outcomes, or specific justifications for the sole-source award, it is difficult to independently assess whether Engility was the best choice or if the government received optimal value. Further investigation into contract databases and performance assessment reports would be necessary.

How does the $12.5 million contract value compare to industry benchmarks for professional and management development training for federal agencies of similar size and scope?

Comparing the $12.5 million contract value requires context that is not fully provided. The NAICS code 611430 covers a broad range of professional development training. The U.S. Coast Guard's specific training needs, the number of instructors to be trained, the duration and intensity of the training programs, and the specialized nature of the content would all influence the cost. However, for a sole-source, Time and Materials contract, $12.5 million is a substantial sum. Industry benchmarks for similar federal training initiatives, especially those that are competitively procured, might offer a point of comparison. Without knowing the specifics of the services rendered and the market rates for comparable sole-source procurements, it's challenging to definitively state if this represents good or poor value. A detailed cost-benefit analysis and comparison with competitively awarded contracts for similar services would be needed.

What are the potential risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type used for this training service, and what mitigation strategies were likely employed?

The Time and Materials (T&M) contract type, used here for training instructors, carries inherent risks for the government. The primary risk is cost escalation, as the contractor is reimbursed for direct labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M does not provide a strong incentive for the contractor to control costs or complete work efficiently. This can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently. Potential mitigation strategies employed by the U.S. Coast Guard would typically include establishing strong contract surveillance, defining labor categories and rates carefully, setting clear ceilings on total contract cost, and requiring detailed reporting of hours and materials. Robust oversight by contracting officers and program managers is essential to manage these risks effectively.

Given the contract's sole-source nature and its expiration date in 2004, what is the historical spending pattern for this specific training requirement, and has it been re-competed or continued under

The provided data indicates the contract's end date was September 30, 2004. This suggests the contract is historical and likely expired. The sole-source award in 2004 means it was not competed at that time. To understand the historical spending pattern and whether this requirement has been met since, further research into subsequent U.S. Coast Guard training contracts would be necessary. It is plausible that the requirement for training instructors has continued, and if so, it may have been addressed through subsequent competitive procurements, other sole-source awards, or potentially through different contract vehicles or agencies. Analyzing spending trends for similar training services over time would reveal if this was a one-off expenditure or part of an ongoing program.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Business Schools and Computer and Management Training › Professional and Management Development Training

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Science Applications International Corporation

Address: 3033 SCIENCE PARK ROAD, SAN DIEGO, CA, 92121

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,467,359

Exercised Options: $12,467,359

Current Obligation: $12,467,359

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline