EPA awards $23.3M environmental consulting contract to ICF Associates, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,350,565 ($23.4M)

Contractor: ICF Associates, LLC

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2001-10-15

End Date: 2007-06-01

Contract Duration: 2,055 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: FAIRFAX, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22031

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $23.4 million to ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust market. 2. Duration of 2055 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 3. Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type may incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored. 4. The contract was awarded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 5. Services fall under environmental consulting, a critical sector for regulatory compliance and public health. 6. The contract's value is significant, reflecting substantial environmental needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $23.3 million over approximately 5.6 years averages to about $4.1 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale environmental consulting contracts is difficult without more specific service details. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure can sometimes lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently, as contractor profit is based on a fixed fee regardless of the actual costs incurred. This pricing structure warrants careful oversight to ensure value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of two bidders suggests a competitive environment, though a higher number of bidders typically leads to more aggressive pricing and better value discovery. The agency's decision to use full and open competition is generally a positive sign for market engagement and potential cost savings.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from the potential for competitive pricing inherent in a full and open competition, as it encourages multiple firms to offer their best terms to secure the contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely federal agencies requiring environmental consulting services, such as the EPA, to meet regulatory and operational needs. Services delivered include environmental consulting, which can encompass a wide range of activities like impact assessments, remediation planning, and regulatory compliance support. The geographic impact is likely national, given the EPA's mandate, though specific project locations would vary. Workforce implications include the creation or sustainment of jobs within the environmental consulting sector, both at the prime contractor and potentially at subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can lead to less cost certainty for the government compared to fixed-price contracts.
The long contract duration (2055 days) requires sustained oversight to ensure continued performance and value.
Limited competition with only two bidders might mean less aggressive pricing than a more crowded field.
Lack of specific performance metrics or deliverables in the provided data makes it hard to assess effectiveness.
The NAICS code 541620 (Environmental Consulting Services) is broad; specific service quality is not detailed.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible process.
The contractor, ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC, has secured a significant federal contract, suggesting established capabilities.
The contract is managed by the EPA, a primary agency for environmental matters, implying relevance and importance.
The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term need for these critical environmental services.

Sector Analysis

Environmental consulting services represent a significant segment of the professional services market, driven by regulatory requirements, corporate sustainability initiatives, and government needs. The market includes firms specializing in areas such as environmental impact assessments, site remediation, compliance auditing, and sustainability planning. Federal spending in this sector is substantial, supporting agencies like the EPA in their mission to protect human health and the environment. This contract fits within the broader landscape of government contracting for environmental expertise, where competition can vary based on the specificity and scale of the required services.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities offered by the prime contractor, ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC. The extent of these opportunities is not detailed here, but larger federal contracts often include provisions for small business subcontracting goals to foster their participation in the federal marketplace.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the contracting agency. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, rigorous financial oversight and performance monitoring are crucial to ensure that costs remain reasonable and that the fixed fee is justified by the services rendered. The EPA likely has established procedures for tracking expenditures, reviewing contractor performance reports, and ensuring compliance with contract terms. The Inspector General's office for the EPA would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Environmental Consulting Services
Environmental Protection Agency Contracts
Professional Services Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
Limited number of bidders (2) may indicate reduced competitive pressure.
Long contract duration necessitates sustained performance monitoring.
Broad NAICS code (541620) requires detailed understanding of specific services for full assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $23.4 million to ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2001-10-15. End: 2007-06-01.

What is the track record of ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC in performing similar federal contracts?

ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC has a substantial history of federal contracting, particularly with agencies like the EPA. While the specific details of past performance on contracts of this exact scale and scope are not provided in this data snippet, their ability to win a $23.3 million contract through full and open competition suggests a demonstrated capability and a positive track record. Federal procurement databases often contain past performance evaluations which would offer more granular insights into their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedules and budgets on previous engagements. Reviewing these evaluations would provide a clearer picture of their suitability for this long-term environmental consulting role.

How does the $23.3 million contract value compare to typical EPA spending on environmental consulting?

The $23.3 million contract value represents a significant investment by the EPA in environmental consulting services over its 2055-day duration. To benchmark this, one would need to analyze historical EPA spending patterns for similar services, categorized by NAICS code 541620 (Environmental Consulting Services) and contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee). Annual spending on environmental consulting can fluctuate based on agency priorities, legislative mandates, and specific project needs. A contract of this magnitude suggests a substantial, ongoing requirement, potentially related to major environmental programs, regulatory support, or large-scale assessment/remediation efforts. Without comparative data on the average size and duration of EPA's environmental consulting contracts, it's difficult to definitively state if this is high or low, but it indicates a considerable allocation of resources.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this size?

The primary risk with a CPFF contract of this magnitude ($23.3 million) is the potential for cost escalation. While the 'fixed fee' component provides some cost certainty regarding the contractor's profit, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor's actual allowable costs. If the contractor's costs are higher than anticipated due to inefficiencies, scope creep, or poor management, the total contract price will increase, potentially exceeding initial estimates. This necessitates robust government oversight to scrutinize all incurred costs, ensure they are reasonable and allocable, and prevent unnecessary spending. Another risk is the contractor's incentive to be less cost-conscious compared to fixed-price contracts, as their fee is fixed regardless of the final cost.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for money for environmental consulting services?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in federal contracting, including for environmental consulting services. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it fosters a competitive environment where multiple firms vie for the contract. This competition typically drives down prices, encourages innovation, and leads to the selection of the offeror providing the best overall value (considering price, technical approach, past performance, etc.). For environmental consulting, where technical expertise is paramount, full and open competition allows the agency to compare diverse approaches and select the most qualified and cost-effective solution. The presence of two bidders in this case indicates some level of competition, but a larger pool would likely yield even greater value.

What are the potential implications of this contract on the small business ecosystem?

As this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false) and was awarded via full and open competition, its direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless subcontracting opportunities are actively pursued. Large prime contractors like ICF ASSOCIATES, LLC are often encouraged or required to meet small business subcontracting goals. If ICF actively seeks out and utilizes small businesses for specialized environmental services, this contract could provide valuable work and growth opportunities for them. Conversely, if subcontracting opportunities are minimal or not prioritized, the direct benefit to the small business sector from this specific award would be negligible, potentially concentrating the work among larger firms.

What oversight mechanisms are typically in place for a contract of this nature managed by the EPA?

For a contract of this nature managed by the EPA, oversight typically involves several layers. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) plays a crucial role in day-to-day monitoring of performance, ensuring deliverables meet requirements, and managing the technical aspects of the contract. Financial oversight is conducted by contract specialists and potentially the EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) to ensure costs are allowable, reasonable, and allocable, especially given the CPFF structure. Regular progress reports from the contractor, site visits (if applicable), and performance reviews are standard. The EPA's internal policies and procedures, along with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), dictate the specific oversight requirements and accountability measures.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Environmental Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: ICF International, Inc. (UEI: 139001544)

Address: 9300 LEE HIGHWAY, FAIRFAX, VA, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Timeline