Treasury's $9.8M contract for ACSI methodology website services awarded to Foresee Results, Inc. in 2004

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,838,075 ($9.8M)

Contractor: Foresee Results, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of the Treasury

Start Date: 2004-01-07

End Date: 2009-02-23

Contract Duration: 1,874 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SUBSCRIPTION TYPE SERVICE OF WEBSITE MODELS AND SURVEYS BASED ON THE ACSI METHODOLOGY

Place of Performance

Location: ANN ARBOR, WASHTENAW County, MICHIGAN, 48108

State: Michigan Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Treasury obligated $9.8 million to FORESEE RESULTS, INC. for work described as: SUBSCRIPTION TYPE SERVICE OF WEBSITE MODELS AND SURVEYS BASED ON THE ACSI METHODOLOGY Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating predictable costs for the government. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential price discovery and value. 3. The duration of the contract (over 5 years) suggests a long-term need for these services. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to general management consulting services. 5. The contract was awarded under the "M" (Michigan) small business set-aside program, though the contractor is a firm. 6. The award was made by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, a key component of the Treasury. 7. The contract's value of $9.8M over its term warrants scrutiny for cost-effectiveness.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without comparable data for ACSI methodology website services. The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty, but the lack of competition means there's no direct market comparison to assess if the $9.8M price was optimal. The duration suggests a sustained need, but the absence of competitive bidding prevents a definitive assessment of value for money.

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 among multiple vendors. This approach limits the government's ability to explore a wider range of solutions and potentially secure more competitive pricing. The lack of competition suggests that either only one vendor was deemed capable of meeting the specific requirements, or the procurement strategy did not prioritize competitive bidding.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government may not benefit from the price reductions typically achieved through competitive processes.

Public Impact

The Bureau of the Fiscal Service benefits from access to website models and surveys based on the ACSI methodology. This service likely supports the Treasury's efforts to measure and improve customer satisfaction with its services. The geographic impact is national, as the Bureau of the Fiscal Service operates across the United States. The contract supports the administrative and management consulting sector, potentially involving specialized analytical and technical expertise.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than could have been achieved through a competitive process.
The long contract duration without re-competition could indicate a missed opportunity for cost savings or service improvements.
Sole-source awards can reduce transparency and accountability in government spending.
The specific nature of ACSI methodology services might limit the pool of qualified contractors, potentially justifying a sole-source award, but this needs verification.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded to a single, presumably qualified, vendor, ensuring continuity of service.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides budget certainty for the government.
The service provided is based on a recognized methodology (ACSI), suggesting a structured approach to data collection and analysis.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the administrative management and general management consulting services sector, specifically focusing on survey methodology and website services. This sector is crucial for government agencies seeking to understand and improve public engagement and service delivery. The market for such specialized consulting services can be competitive, but specific methodologies like ACSI might lead to a more concentrated vendor landscape. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more detail on the scope and deliverables.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under the "M" (Michigan) small business set-aside program, which is intended to provide opportunities for small businesses. However, the contractor, Foresee Results, Inc., is listed as a firm, and its size status relative to the set-aside criteria would need further investigation. If Foresee Results, Inc. qualified as a small business for this specific contract, it indicates a successful set-aside. If not, it raises questions about the procurement process and adherence to small business goals.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Bureau of the Fiscal Service and the Department of the Treasury. As a sole-source award, there may be less public scrutiny compared to competed contracts. Accountability measures would be defined by the contract terms and performance metrics. Transparency could be enhanced through public contract databases, but detailed performance reports might not be readily available.

Related Government Programs

Customer Satisfaction Surveys
Management and Consulting Services
Website Development and Maintenance
Data Analysis Services
Government Performance Measurement

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Long contract duration without re-competition
Potential for unverified value for money

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Treasury awarded $9.8 million to FORESEE RESULTS, INC.. SUBSCRIPTION TYPE SERVICE OF WEBSITE MODELS AND SURVEYS BASED ON THE ACSI METHODOLOGY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FORESEE RESULTS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Treasury (Bureau of the Fiscal Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $9.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-01-07. End: 2009-02-23.

What is the specific nature of the ACSI methodology services provided under this contract, and how are they utilized by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service?

The contract specifies 'SUBSCRIPTION TYPE SERVICE OF WEBSITE MODELS AND SURVEYS BASED ON THE ACSI METHODOLOGY.' This suggests that the Bureau of the Fiscal Service subscribed to a service that provided access to website-based tools and survey platforms designed according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) methodology. The ACSI is a widely recognized national benchmark for measuring customer satisfaction across various sectors. The Bureau likely used these services to gather feedback on its own programs and services, identify areas for improvement, and track changes in public perception over time. The subscription model implies ongoing access to the platform and potentially updates to the methodology or tools.

Given the sole-source nature of this award, what justification was provided for not competing the contract?

While the provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' it does not include the specific justification. Typically, sole-source awards require a justification that demonstrates why full and open competition is not feasible or advantageous. Common reasons include the existence of only one responsible source, urgent and compelling needs, or specific requirements that only one contractor can meet. For a specialized service like ACSI methodology, the justification might have centered on Foresee Results, Inc. being the sole provider of this specific licensed methodology or platform, or possessing unique expertise essential for the Bureau's needs. Without the official justification document, it's difficult to definitively assess the validity of the sole-source award.

How does the contract's value of $9.8 million over approximately five years compare to similar government contracts for customer satisfaction survey services?

Direct comparison of this $9.8 million contract value is difficult without more granular data on the scope of services, user base, and specific deliverables. However, for a five-year period, this equates to roughly $1.96 million per year. This figure needs to be assessed against the scale of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service's operations and the breadth of its customer base. If the ACSI services were used extensively across multiple Treasury programs or for a very large population, the cost might be reasonable. Conversely, if the scope was limited, it could represent a higher-than-average expenditure. The lack of competition further complicates a value assessment, as market rates from competitive bids are absent.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this duration for website and survey services?

A primary risk of a sole-source contract, especially one spanning over five years (2004-2009 in this case), is the potential for inflated costs due to the absence of competitive pressure. The government may end up paying more than necessary. Another risk is vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes dependent on a single provider, making it difficult and costly to switch even if better alternatives emerge. Furthermore, without competition, there might be less incentive for the contractor to innovate or proactively improve service quality beyond the contract's minimum requirements. Finally, sole-source awards can raise concerns about fairness and transparency in the procurement process.

What was the track record of Foresee Results, Inc. prior to or during this contract, particularly regarding government service delivery?

Information on Foresee Results, Inc.'s track record prior to or during this specific $9.8 million contract with the Bureau of the Fiscal Service is not detailed in the provided data. However, Foresee Results, Inc. (now part of Foresee by Merkle) has a history of providing customer experience analytics and website testing services to various organizations, including government agencies. Their expertise in the ACSI methodology is well-established. To fully assess their track record for this contract, one would need to examine performance reviews, any past performance questionnaires (PPQs), contract termination history, and any documented issues or successes related to their government contracts during that period.

How does the $9.8M contract value compare to the overall spending of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service or the Department of the Treasury during the contract period?

The provided data does not include the overall spending figures for the Bureau of the Fiscal Service or the Department of the Treasury during the contract period (2004-2009). Therefore, a direct comparison of the $9.8 million contract value to the agency's total budget is not possible. To contextualize this spending, one would need to access historical budget documents or financial reports for the Treasury and its bureaus. This would allow for an assessment of whether this contract represented a significant portion of the Bureau's expenditures or was a relatively minor investment within the larger departmental financial landscape.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 2929 PLYMOUTH RD STE 220, ANN ARBOR, MI, 06

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $9,903,519

Exercised Options: $9,838,075

Current Obligation: $9,838,075

Timeline