USAID's $1.65B contract for population and health data services awarded to ICF Macro Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $164,875,574 ($164.9M)

Contractor: ICF Macro Inc

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2018-09-10

End Date: 2025-02-26

Contract Duration: 2,361 days

Daily Burn Rate: $69.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PRH/PEC -- DHS-8. THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO IMPROVE THE COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND DISSEMINATION OF POPULATION, HEALTH, AND NUTRITION DATA AND TO FACILITATE USE OF THESE DATA FOR PLANNING, POLICY-MAKING, AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20001

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $164.9 million to ICF MACRO INC for work described as: PRH/PEC -- DHS-8. THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO IMPROVE THE COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND DISSEMINATION OF POPULATION, HEALTH, AND NUTRITION DATA AND TO FACILITATE USE OF THESE DATA FOR PLANNING, POLICY-MAKING, AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT. Key points: 1. Contract aims to enhance collection, analysis, and dissemination of critical population, health, and nutrition data. 2. Focus on data utilization for planning, policy-making, and program management highlights strategic importance. 3. Long-term contract duration suggests a sustained need for these specialized data services. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a broad market search. 5. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) incentivizes performance while managing costs. 6. Geographic focus on District of Columbia may indicate a centralized data hub or administrative function.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total contract value of $1.65 billion over its period of performance is substantial, reflecting the critical nature of population, health, and nutrition data. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale data analysis and dissemination contracts is challenging due to the specific scope. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee structure suggests a mechanism for ensuring value for money by tying a portion of the contractor's fee to performance metrics. Further analysis would require detailed performance data and comparison with industry standards for data analytics services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. This competitive process is generally expected to lead to better pricing and innovative solutions. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open competition is a positive indicator for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and improve the quality of services received.

Public Impact

Beneficiaries include policymakers, program managers, and researchers who rely on accurate population, health, and nutrition data. Services delivered encompass data collection, analysis, and dissemination, crucial for evidence-based decision-making. Geographic impact is likely global, given USAID's mission, though administrative functions may be centered in Washington D.C. Workforce implications may include roles in data science, public health, international development, and program management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns given the Cost Plus Award Fee structure if performance incentives are not well-defined or managed.
Dependence on a single contractor for a significant period could pose risks if performance degrades or strategic needs shift.

Positive Signals

The long-term nature of the contract (over 6 years) indicates a stable and ongoing need for these critical data services.
Award under full and open competition suggests a robust selection process and potential for high-quality service delivery.
The focus on improving data collection, analysis, and dissemination aligns with best practices for evidence-based development.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services sector, specifically focusing on data analysis and management for public health and population studies. The market for such services is large and competitive, encompassing firms specializing in data science, research, and international development consulting. USAID's significant investment reflects the growing importance of data-driven approaches in global development and humanitarian aid.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, the direct impact on small businesses through set-asides is likely minimal. However, the prime contractor, ICF Macro Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill specific aspects of the contract, contributing indirectly to the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Agency for International Development (USAID) contracting officers and program officials. Performance monitoring, financial audits, and adherence to contract terms are standard oversight mechanisms. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific performance metrics and evaluations may not always be publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

Global Health Data Initiatives
Population Statistics and Demographics
International Development Data Analysis
Health Information Systems
Nutrition Surveillance Programs

Risk Flags

Long-term contract duration may increase risk of scope misalignment with evolving needs.
Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires diligent performance monitoring to ensure value for money.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical data services over an extended period.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $164.9 million to ICF MACRO INC. PRH/PEC -- DHS-8. THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO IMPROVE THE COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND DISSEMINATION OF POPULATION, HEALTH, AND NUTRITION DATA AND TO FACILITATE USE OF THESE DATA FOR PLANNING, POLICY-MAKING, AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ICF MACRO INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Agency for International Development (Agency for International Development).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $164.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-09-10. End: 2025-02-26.

What is the historical spending pattern for population, health, and nutrition data services by USAID?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for population, health, and nutrition data services by USAID is crucial for understanding the agency's commitment and investment in this area. While specific historical data for this exact contract's predecessors is not provided, USAID has consistently allocated significant resources towards global health initiatives, which inherently rely on robust data collection and analysis. Trends often show an increasing emphasis on data-driven decision-making and evidence-based programming, suggesting a growing demand for services like those provided under this contract. Examining past contract awards for similar services, including those for data management, research, and technical assistance in health and population sectors, would reveal the scale and evolution of USAID's investments over time. This context helps in evaluating whether the current contract's value aligns with historical trends and future strategic priorities.

How does ICF Macro Inc.'s track record in similar government contracts inform the assessment of this award?

ICF Macro Inc. has a substantial track record of performing complex data analysis, research, and technical assistance for various government agencies, including USAID. Their experience often spans areas like public health, social services, and environmental programs. Assessing their past performance on similar contracts is key to understanding their capability to deliver on the objectives of this new award. This involves reviewing past contract performance evaluations, any reported issues or successes, and their ability to manage large-scale, long-term projects. A history of successful contract completion, meeting performance metrics, and managing budgets effectively would indicate a lower risk for this $1.65 billion contract. Conversely, any significant past performance issues could raise concerns about the contractor's reliability and the potential for successful execution.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the success of this contract, and how are they measured?

The success of this contract is likely evaluated through a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) tied to the 'Award Fee' component of the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type. While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, they would typically focus on the quality, timeliness, and impact of the collected, analyzed, and disseminated population, health, and nutrition data. Examples of KPIs could include the accuracy and completeness of data sets, the speed of data analysis and reporting, the usability and accessibility of disseminated data for policymakers and program managers, and the demonstrable impact of the data on planning and policy-making. Measurement would involve regular reviews by USAID, potentially including user feedback, data quality assessments, and analysis of how the data has been utilized in decision-making processes. The 'Award Fee' portion of the contract would be adjusted based on performance against these KPIs.

What is the potential risk associated with the long duration (over 6 years) of this contract?

The long duration of this contract, spanning over six years, presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's the risk of scope creep or evolving requirements. Over such an extended period, the needs and priorities of USAID, or the broader landscape of population, health, and nutrition data, may change significantly. If the contract is not managed flexibly, it could become outdated or fail to meet new demands. Secondly, there's a risk related to contractor performance degradation over time; initial high performance might wane. Thirdly, long-term reliance on a single contractor can reduce market responsiveness and potentially lead to complacency. Finally, economic or political shifts could impact funding or strategic direction, making a long-term commitment less viable. Mitigating these risks requires robust contract management, regular performance reviews, and mechanisms for adapting the contract's scope and objectives as needed.

How does the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type influence value for money compared to other contract types?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type aims to balance cost control with performance incentives, offering a different approach to value for money compared to fixed-price or cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts. In a CPAF structure, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a base amount and an award amount. The award amount is determined by the government based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. This incentivizes the contractor to exceed minimum requirements and deliver high-quality services, potentially leading to better outcomes and thus better value. However, it also introduces a degree of uncertainty in the final cost, as the award fee can vary. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPAF offers more flexibility for services where the scope is not precisely defined upfront, reducing the risk of cost overruns due to unforeseen complexities. Compared to Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), the award fee is often more subjective and tied to broader performance objectives rather than specific cost or schedule targets.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 7200AA18R00003

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 9300 LEE HWY, FAIRFAX, VA, 22031

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $214,179,751

Exercised Options: $214,179,751

Current Obligation: $164,875,574

Actual Outlays: $150,990,083

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 94

Total Subaward Amount: $33,894,281

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline