Agriculture's $4.38M Management Consulting Contract Awarded to Jefferson Consulting Group

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,377,546 ($4.4M)

Contractor: Jefferson Consulting Group LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Agriculture

Start Date: 2024-09-23

End Date: 2026-09-22

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ACQUISITION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20006

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Agriculture obligated $4.4 million to JEFFERSON CONSULTING GROUP LLC for work described as: ACQUISITION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract provides essential administrative management and general management consulting services. 2. Awarded under a full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration of 729 days indicates a medium-term need for these services. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 aligns with standard consulting services. 6. The contract is a BPA Call, indicating it's an order against a pre-existing Blanket Purchase Agreement.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $4.38 million for administrative management and general management consulting services over approximately two years appears reasonable. Benchmarking against similar contracts for consulting services requires access to a broader dataset of comparable awards. However, the firm fixed-price structure suggests that the government has negotiated a defined cost for the services, which is a positive indicator for value. Without specific performance metrics or detailed service breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the competitive award process provides some assurance.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit an offer. This approach typically fosters a competitive environment, encouraging multiple bidders to present their best pricing and technical solutions. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a robust competition that should lead to fair market pricing and a selection based on merit.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs through competitive pressure and ensuring the government receives the most advantageous offer available.

Public Impact

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer within the Department of Agriculture is the primary beneficiary, receiving support for administrative and management functions. Services delivered are expected to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the agency's financial operations and general management. The contract's geographic impact is centered in the District of Columbia, where the agency's headquarters are located. The contract supports professional services, potentially impacting a workforce of consultants and analysts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to fully assess the impact and effectiveness of the consulting services.
The total contract value, while seemingly reasonable, could be further scrutinized against detailed service delivery plans.
Dependence on external consultants for administrative and management functions may raise questions about internal capacity building.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive process that likely yielded favorable pricing.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty and reduces the risk of cost overruns for the government.
The contract supports critical administrative and financial functions within a major federal agency.

Sector Analysis

The administrative management and general management consulting services sector is a significant part of the federal procurement landscape, supporting agencies across various functions. This contract falls within the professional services category, which is characterized by a wide range of specialized expertise. The market for these services is competitive, with numerous firms vying for government contracts. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the average cost of similar consulting engagements across different federal agencies and contract durations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, Jefferson Consulting Group LLC, is likely a small business itself, given its name, but the contract was not awarded under a small business set-aside program.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically reside within the Department of Agriculture's Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the contracting agency. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon budget. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Administrative Management Support Services
General Management Consulting Services
Financial Management Consulting
Professional Services Contracts
BPA Call Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep
Performance not meeting expectations
Lack of detailed performance metrics in award data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Agriculture awarded $4.4 million to JEFFERSON CONSULTING GROUP LLC. ACQUISITION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JEFFERSON CONSULTING GROUP LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Agriculture (Office of the Chief Financial Officer).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-09-23. End: 2026-09-22.

What is the track record of Jefferson Consulting Group LLC with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Agriculture?

Jefferson Consulting Group LLC has a history of performing federal contracts. A comprehensive review of their past performance, including contract values, agencies served, and performance ratings, would be necessary for a full assessment. Their experience with the Department of Agriculture specifically, and in providing administrative management and general management consulting services, is crucial. Analyzing their award history can reveal patterns in their success rate, the types of services they are most frequently contracted for, and any potential red flags or commendations from previous government engagements. Without access to a detailed contract database or performance reports, it's difficult to provide specific examples, but their continued ability to win contracts suggests a level of competence and compliance.

How does the awarded value of $4.38 million compare to similar administrative management consulting contracts within the federal government?

Benchmarking this $4.38 million contract requires comparing it against similar 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' (NAICS 541611) awarded over comparable timeframes (approximately two years) and to similar-sized agencies. Federal procurement data often shows significant variation in consulting contract values based on scope, complexity, and duration. A contract of this value for a two-year period is not uncommon for specialized consulting support within a large federal agency like the Department of Agriculture. However, a precise comparison would necessitate analyzing the specific deliverables and the number of personnel or hours allocated, which are not detailed in the provided data. Generally, larger agencies with complex operations tend to award larger consulting contracts.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Primary risks for this contract include potential scope creep, where the consulting services extend beyond the initially defined objectives, leading to cost overruns or delays. Another risk is the contractor's performance not meeting the agency's expectations, impacting the effectiveness of administrative and financial operations. A lack of clear performance metrics could exacerbate this. Mitigation strategies are likely embedded in the contract's firm fixed-price structure, which incentivizes the contractor to manage costs and adhere to the scope. The Department of Agriculture's oversight, through the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and the requirement for regular reporting and deliverables serve as additional mitigation measures. Clear communication channels and defined milestones are also critical for managing performance risks.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' process in ensuring optimal value for taxpayer dollars in this specific instance?

The 'full and open competition' process is designed to maximize value for taxpayers by encouraging a wide range of potential contractors to bid, thereby fostering price competition and innovation. In this instance, with Jefferson Consulting Group LLC being awarded the contract, it suggests that their proposal was deemed the most advantageous among all submitted offers. The effectiveness is contingent on the number of bids received and the rigor of the evaluation criteria. If multiple qualified bidders participated, the competitive pressure likely resulted in a fair market price. However, without knowing the number of bidders or the specific evaluation metrics used, it's challenging to definitively state the 'optimal' value achieved. The firm fixed-price nature further supports value by capping costs.

What is the historical spending pattern for administrative management and general management consulting services at the Department of Agriculture?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for administrative management and general management consulting services at the Department of Agriculture would provide context for this $4.38 million award. Federal agencies often have recurring needs for such services to support evolving operational requirements, implement new policies, or address specific management challenges. Understanding the typical annual or biennial spending on these types of services, the average contract values, and the dominant contractors can reveal trends. For instance, consistent high spending might indicate a persistent need or reliance on external expertise, while fluctuating spending could suggest project-based requirements or shifts in internal capabilities. This specific contract's value should be assessed against these historical norms to determine if it represents an increase, decrease, or continuation of past investment levels.

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) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1666 K ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20006

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,903,150

Exercised Options: $4,377,546

Current Obligation: $4,377,546

Actual Outlays: $2,370,802

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 1202SB24T0001

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline