Transportation's $12.2M ITS Program Assessment Support contract awarded to Noblis, Inc. for engineering services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,223,554 ($12.2M)

Contractor: Noblis, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2005-04-19

End Date: 2012-04-30

Contract Duration: 2,568 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.8K/day

Competition Type: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Transportation

Official Description: ITS PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: FALLS CHURCH, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22042

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $12.2 million to NOBLIS, INC. for work described as: ITS PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in program assessment capabilities. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract need further examination to ensure optimal value. 3. Performance duration of over 7 years suggests a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract's focus on engineering services aligns with critical infrastructure development. 5. Sector positioning within transportation infrastructure highlights its strategic importance.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $12.2 million over approximately 7 years suggests a moderate annual spend. Benchmarking this against similar program assessment contracts within the Department of Transportation or other federal agencies would be necessary to determine if the pricing is competitive. Without specific details on the services rendered and their complexity, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed carefully, but it also allows for flexibility in evolving program needs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was competed under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), indicating it was likely a full and open competition among eligible bidders. The award of a single delivery order suggests that multiple proposals may have been received and evaluated, but the specific number of bidders is not provided. Competition under SAP aims to balance efficiency with market reach, but the level of competition can vary significantly.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition, even under SAP, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing and a wider pool of potential service providers, leading to potentially better value.

Public Impact

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) benefits from enhanced program assessment capabilities. Services delivered likely support the evaluation and improvement of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). The geographic impact is primarily national, supporting federal transportation initiatives. Workforce implications include the need for specialized engineering and program analysis skills.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF contract type if not closely monitored.
  • Limited transparency on the specific metrics used for program assessment.
  • The long duration could lead to vendor lock-in if not managed proactively.

Positive Signals

  • Award to an established firm like Noblis, Inc. suggests a level of confidence in their capabilities.
  • The contract's focus on ITS aligns with modernization efforts in transportation.
  • Competition under SAP indicates an effort to leverage market efficiencies.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting the Information Technology (IT) and Transportation sectors through program assessment. The market for engineering and technical support services to government agencies is substantial, with significant spending allocated to IT modernization and infrastructure projects. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other contracts for program management, systems engineering, and technical assistance within federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless Noblis, Inc. voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed for a comprehensive analysis.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) and program managers within the Federal Highway Administration. Accountability measures are inherent in the CPFF contract structure, requiring the contractor to justify costs against the fixed fee. Transparency assessment would depend on the public availability of program assessment reports and performance metrics, which are not detailed in the provided data.

Related Government Programs

  • Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Joint Program Office
  • Federal Highway Administration Research and Development
  • Department of Transportation IT Modernization Initiatives

Risk Flags

  • Contract type (CPFF) may lead to cost overruns if not managed.
  • Limited public information on specific performance metrics and outcomes.
  • Long contract duration could indicate potential for vendor lock-in.

Tags

transportation, department-of-transportation, federal-highway-administration, engineering-services, competed-under-sap, cost-plus-fixed-fee, program-assessment, intelligent-transportation-systems, it, virginia, large-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $12.2 million to NOBLIS, INC.. ITS PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NOBLIS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-04-19. End: 2012-04-30.

What specific program assessment methodologies and tools were employed by Noblis, Inc. under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact program assessment methodologies or tools used by Noblis, Inc. However, given the contract's focus on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and engineering services, it is likely that Noblis employed a range of techniques. These could include performance metrics analysis, cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment frameworks, systems engineering reviews, and potentially data analytics platforms for evaluating ITS program effectiveness. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure suggests that the scope of work might have evolved, requiring adaptable assessment approaches. Detailed reports or statements of work would be necessary to identify the precise methodologies.

How does the annual spending on this contract compare to similar ITS program assessment contracts within the Department of Transportation?

The total contract value of $12.2 million over approximately 2,568 days (about 7 years) equates to an average annual spend of roughly $1.6 million. To compare this to similar contracts, one would need to identify other Department of Transportation (DOT) contracts specifically for ITS program assessment or related engineering support services. Factors such as contract duration, scope of work, and the specific ITS technologies being assessed would need to be considered for a meaningful comparison. Without access to a broader database of DOT contracts, a precise benchmark is difficult to establish, but this annual figure appears moderate for a federal program support contract of this nature.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate Noblis, Inc.'s performance on this contract?

The provided contract data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Noblis, Inc.'s performance. However, for a contract focused on 'ITS PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SUPPORT,' typical KPIs would likely revolve around the quality and timeliness of assessment reports, the accuracy and relevance of data analysis, the identification of actionable recommendations for program improvement, and adherence to budget and schedule constraints. The effectiveness of the contractor in supporting the Federal Highway Administration's decision-making processes regarding ITS programs would also be a critical, albeit qualitative, measure of performance.

What is the historical spending trend for ITS program assessment support within the Federal Highway Administration over the last five years?

The provided data only details a single contract award for 'ITS PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SUPPORT' to Noblis, Inc. from April 2005 to April 2012. To determine historical spending trends, a broader search across Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or similar databases would be required. This would involve identifying all contracts awarded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Department of Transportation (DOT) for ITS program assessment, technical support, or related engineering services over the past five years. Analyzing the total obligated amounts, number of awards, and average contract values would reveal trends in investment in this area.

Were there any significant challenges or risks identified during the performance of this contract, and how were they mitigated?

The provided data does not contain specific information regarding challenges or risks encountered during the performance of this contract. However, common risks associated with long-term, cost-plus contracts include scope creep, cost overruns, and potential for reduced contractor efficiency over time. Mitigation strategies typically employed by agencies involve robust contract management, regular performance reviews, clear definition of deliverables, and proactive communication between the government and the contractor. The Federal Highway Administration would have had a Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) responsible for monitoring performance and addressing any issues that arose.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3150 FAIRVIEW PARK DR, FALLS CHURCH, VA, 22042

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,223,554

Exercised Options: $12,223,554

Current Obligation: $12,223,554

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFH6105D00002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-04-19

Current End Date: 2012-04-30

Potential End Date: 2012-04-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2020-04-27

More Contracts from Noblis, Inc.

View all Noblis, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Transportation Contracts

View all Department of Transportation contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending