Leidos Inc. awarded $63M for FEMA training, with 4 contracts and a 3.5-year duration
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $62,959,783 ($63.0M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Start Date: 2009-04-01
End Date: 2012-09-22
Contract Duration: 1,270 days
Daily Burn Rate: $49.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: TRAINING DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY (INSTRUCTION) FOR FEMA/CENTER OF DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS (CDP) INCLUDING BOTH RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT TRAINING.
Place of Performance
Location: ANNISTON, CALHOUN County, ALABAMA, 36205
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Homeland Security obligated $63.0 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: TRAINING DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY (INSTRUCTION) FOR FEMA/CENTER OF DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS (CDP) INCLUDING BOTH RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT TRAINING. Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes performance but can lead to higher costs if not managed carefully. 3. The contract duration of 1270 days (approx. 3.5 years) indicates a significant, long-term training requirement. 4. The contract was awarded to a single vendor, Leidos, Inc., for a specific training development and delivery requirement. 5. The scope includes both resident and non-resident training, indicating a broad reach for FEMA's preparedness efforts. 6. The contract's value of approximately $63 million over its term suggests substantial investment in emergency preparedness training.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's Cost Plus Award Fee structure allows for performance-based incentives, but also carries inherent risks of cost overruns if not closely monitored. Benchmarking the per-unit cost of training delivery would be crucial to assess value for money, as raw contract value alone does not indicate efficiency. Comparing this contract's pricing to similar large-scale training development and delivery contracts for government agencies would provide further context on its cost-effectiveness.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. The presence of four bids suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specialized training service. A competitive bidding process generally helps in achieving fair market prices and encourages vendors to offer their best value propositions.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the most cost-effective training solutions for FEMA's critical domestic preparedness mission.
Public Impact
FEMA personnel and potentially state and local emergency responders benefit from enhanced training in domestic preparedness. The services delivered include the development and delivery of both resident and non-resident training programs. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, given FEMA's mission, with specific training locations determined by program needs. The contract supports a workforce of instructors and training developers, contributing to specialized job opportunities in the education and emergency management sectors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Award Fee contracts can sometimes lead to higher final costs than fixed-price contracts if performance incentives are not carefully structured and monitored.
- The long duration of the contract could present risks if training needs or technologies evolve significantly during its term.
- Reliance on a single contractor for a significant portion of training development and delivery may limit flexibility in adapting to unforeseen changes.
Positive Signals
- The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
- The inclusion of award fees incentivizes high performance and quality in training delivery.
- The scope covers both resident and non-resident training, demonstrating a comprehensive approach to preparedness education.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the professional and management development training sector, specifically focused on emergency preparedness. The market for government training services is substantial, with agencies like FEMA requiring continuous development to maintain readiness. This contract represents a significant investment in human capital development for national security and emergency response.
Small Business Impact
The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Further investigation would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved as subcontractors or if there were opportunities missed for their participation.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure necessitates close monitoring of costs and performance to ensure value. Inspector General reviews may also occur to ensure compliance and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.
Related Government Programs
- FEMA Training Programs
- Emergency Management Training
- Homeland Security Training
- Professional Development Services
Risk Flags
- Cost Plus Award Fee contract type requires close monitoring to control costs.
- Long contract duration may pose risks if training needs evolve.
- Need to verify specific performance metrics for award fee determination.
Tags
fema, training-development-and-delivery, instruction, center-of-domestic-preparedness, resident-training, non-resident-training, leidos-inc, department-of-homeland-security, federal-emergency-management-agency, professional-and-management-development-training, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-award-fee
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Homeland Security awarded $63.0 million to LEIDOS, INC.. TRAINING DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY (INSTRUCTION) FOR FEMA/CENTER OF DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS (CDP) INCLUDING BOTH RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT TRAINING.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $63.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-04-01. End: 2012-09-22.
What was the historical spending pattern for FEMA's domestic preparedness training prior to this contract?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for FEMA's domestic preparedness training prior to this contract would provide crucial context for evaluating the $63 million award. Without specific historical data, it's difficult to ascertain if this represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment. Understanding past expenditures would allow for a comparison of the scale and scope of training initiatives over time, identifying trends in funding allocation towards resident versus non-resident training, and assessing whether previous contracts were also awarded under similar competitive structures or contract types. This historical perspective is vital for determining if the current contract's value is aligned with long-term strategic investments in preparedness or if it represents a significant shift in resource allocation.
How does the per-unit cost of training delivery under this contract compare to similar government training contracts?
A key aspect of assessing the value for money of this $63 million contract is comparing its per-unit cost of training delivery against benchmarks from similar government contracts. This requires identifying comparable training programs, whether for emergency management, public safety, or other specialized government functions, and analyzing their cost per participant or per training hour. Factors such as the complexity of the curriculum, the qualifications of instructors, the duration of training sessions, and the logistical requirements (e.g., travel, facilities) all influence per-unit costs. If this contract's per-unit costs are significantly higher than comparable contracts without a clear justification (e.g., unique specialization, higher quality standards), it could indicate potential inefficiencies or overpricing. Conversely, lower costs might suggest effective procurement and efficient service delivery.
What specific performance metrics were used to determine award fees for Leidos, Inc. under this contract?
The performance metrics used to determine award fees for Leidos, Inc. under this Cost Plus Award Fee contract are critical for understanding how contractor performance was evaluated and incentivized. These metrics typically align with the contract's objectives, such as the quality of training materials developed, the effectiveness of instruction as measured by participant feedback or post-training assessments, adherence to schedules, and overall client satisfaction. The specific metrics would have been defined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS). A review of these metrics would reveal what aspects of training development and delivery were prioritized and how success was quantitatively or qualitatively measured. Understanding these metrics is essential for assessing whether the award fees paid were justified by demonstrable high performance.
What is the track record of Leidos, Inc. in delivering large-scale government training programs, particularly in emergency preparedness?
Leidos, Inc. has a substantial track record in delivering complex technology and services to the government, which often includes training components. Their experience in large-scale government programs suggests a capacity to manage significant contracts like the FEMA Center of Domestic Preparedness training. However, a specific deep dive into their performance on similar emergency preparedness training contracts is warranted. This would involve examining past contract performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), any past performance issues or commendations, and their demonstrated ability to meet the unique requirements of emergency response and disaster management training. Assessing their specific expertise in this niche area, beyond general large-contract management, is crucial for confidence in their ability to fulfill FEMA's mission effectively.
What are the potential risks associated with the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) contract type for this specific training requirement?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) contract type, while offering flexibility and incentivizing performance, carries specific risks for a training development and delivery requirement like FEMA's. A primary risk is the potential for cost growth beyond initial estimates, as the government reimburses allowable costs plus an award fee based on performance. If the performance standards are not clearly defined or if contractor costs are not rigorously scrutinized, the final price could escalate significantly. There's also a risk that the focus on achieving award fees might lead contractors to prioritize easily measurable, but perhaps less critical, aspects of training over more complex or innovative elements. Effective oversight, robust cost accounting, and clearly defined, objective performance metrics are essential to mitigate these CPA-related risks.
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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: HSFECD-09-R-0006
Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Address: 10260 CAMPUS POINT DR, SAN DIEGO, CA, 92121
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $96,629,201
Exercised Options: $65,384,853
Current Obligation: $62,959,783
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-04-01
Current End Date: 2012-09-22
Potential End Date: 2022-09-10 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-08-15
More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.
- Science Operation and Maintenance Support for the United States Antarctic Program — $3.1B (National Science Foundation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Department of Transportation)
- THE Facilities Development and Operations Contract(fdoc) Specifies Technical, Managerial, and Adminstrative Work Needed to Ensure the Availablitity, Integrity, and Reliability of Missionoperations Facilites Supporting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa) Human Space Flight (HSF) Programs Requiring Mission Operations Support. the Objective of This Contract IS to Consolidate Efforts Across the Facilities Covered Under Fodoc in Order to Maximize Synergy for Hardware and Software Development, Modification, Sustaining. Maintenance, Reconfiguration, and Operations for the Purpose of Reducing Cost Without Compromising Facility Functionality and Performance. Nasa Will Collaborate With the Contractor on Developing Procedural and Technical Innovations That Improve Quality, Ensure Customer Satisfaction and Reduce Cost. Mission Operations Facilities Currently Support the Space Shuttle Programand the International Space Station Progra, Including International Partner and Commmercial Visiting Vehicles. Mission Operations Facilities Supporting the Cnstellation Program(cxp) ARE Continuously Under Development in Concert With CXP Formulation and Implementation. Fdoc Applies to the Facilities of These Three Programs, and ANY Other HSF Program Requiring Mission Operations Facility Support. in Addition, Future Mission Operations Facilities and Capabilities ARE Within the Technical Scope of This SOW, and Fdoc Worlk Associated With These Facilities Will BE Enabled Through Idiq — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Airspace System (NAS) Implementation Support Contract (nisc). Provides Engineering and Technical Support Services to FAA Organizations Responsible for NAS Transformation, Integration and Implementation in the Areas of Implementation and Integration Planning, Transition Planning, Engineering Support, Environmental Support, Automation Support and Other Engineering and Technical Disciplines AS Required. TAS::69 8107::TAS — $1.1B (Department of Transportation)
- Itssc Task Order for Systems — $1.1B (Social Security Administration)
Other Department of Homeland Security Contracts
- THE United States Coast Guard HAS a Requirement to Procure UP to Twenty-Six (26) Fast Response Cutters (frcs) on a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Basis With an Economic Price Adjustment (EPA). Phase II of the FRC Program Will Complete the Fleet for a Total of 58 Cutters — $2.1B (Bollinger Shipyards Lockport, L.L.C.)
- Design and Construct NEW Vertical Barrier and Power Distribution, Lighting, Cameras, Equipment Shelters and Linear Ground Detection System (lgds) in Hildago County, NM — $1.8B (Fisher Sand & Gravel CO)
- Production&delivery of National Security Cutter (NSC) 6 — $1.7B (Huntington Ingalls Incorporated)
- YUM-2 Vertical Border and Waterborne Barrier Construction — $1.7B (Fisher Sand & Gravel CO)
- Construct Vertical Border Barrier — $1.6B (Fisher Sand & Gravel CO)