HHS awards $10.8M for FDA occupational health services, with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,856,214 ($10.9M)

Contractor: Eagle Health, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2020-02-28

End Date: 2023-03-01

Contract Duration: 1,097 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Healthcare

Official Description: NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION FDA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CLINIC SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: SILVER SPRING, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20993

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $10.9 million to EAGLE HEALTH, LLC for work described as: NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION FDA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CLINIC SERVICES Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the duration and scope of services. 2. Competition was limited, potentially impacting price discovery and cost savings. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with a long contract duration and time-and-materials pricing. 4. Performance context shows a multi-year commitment to occupational health. 5. Sector positioning is within healthcare services, specifically outpatient care centers.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $10.8 million over approximately three years for occupational health clinic services at the FDA appears reasonable. Benchmarking against similar contracts for comprehensive occupational health services in the federal sector suggests this pricing is within expected ranges, though specific service inclusions and geographic scope are critical for precise comparison. The time-and-materials pricing structure, while flexible, can sometimes lead to higher costs if not closely managed and monitored for efficiency.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' designation, indicating a limited competitive process. While the specific justification for this limited competition is not detailed here, it suggests that only one source was deemed capable of meeting the agency's needs, or that the circumstances of the award restricted broader solicitation. The lack of robust competition may have implications for achieving the most favorable pricing and innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can mean taxpayers may not benefit from the full range of competitive pricing and service offerings that a more open bidding process could yield.

Public Impact

Federal employees at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) benefit from accessible occupational health services. Services include routine medical examinations, health screenings, and injury management. The geographic impact is concentrated within the National Capital Region where FDA facilities are located. Workforce implications include ensuring the health and safety of federal employees, contributing to productivity and morale.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time-and-materials pricing can lead to cost overruns if not diligently managed.
Limited competition may result in less favorable pricing for the government.
Contract duration of nearly three years requires ongoing performance monitoring.

Positive Signals

Provides essential occupational health services to a critical federal agency.
The contract ensures continuity of care for FDA employees.
Awarded to a known entity, potentially indicating a stable service provider.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the healthcare services sector, specifically focusing on outpatient care centers (NAICS 621498). The market for federal occupational health services is competitive, with numerous providers offering a range of medical and wellness programs. Spending in this area is driven by the need to maintain the health and safety of federal workforces across various agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing contracts for similar clinic services provided to other large federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, EAGLE HEALTH, LLC, is likely not a small business, or if it is, the contract was not specifically designated for small business participation. The impact on the small business ecosystem is minimal in this instance, as there are no explicit provisions for small business involvement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight of this contract would typically fall under the Department of Health and Human Services' contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would include performance reviews, adherence to service level agreements, and financial audits. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed operational performance metrics may be internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Occupational Health Services
FDA Employee Health Programs
Outpatient Care Center Contracts
Department of Health and Human Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition may impact cost-effectiveness.
Time-and-materials pricing requires diligent oversight to control costs.
Contract duration necessitates ongoing performance monitoring.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $10.9 million to EAGLE HEALTH, LLC. NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION FDA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CLINIC SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is EAGLE HEALTH, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (Food and Drug Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-02-28. End: 2023-03-01.

What is the track record of EAGLE HEALTH, LLC in performing federal contracts, particularly for occupational health services?

EAGLE HEALTH, LLC has been awarded federal contracts, including this one for FDA occupational health services. A deeper analysis of their contract history would involve examining past performance evaluations, any documented issues or disputes, and their success in delivering similar services to other government agencies. Understanding their experience with time-and-materials contracts and their ability to manage costs effectively under such structures would be crucial. Without access to detailed past performance reports, it's difficult to definitively assess their track record beyond the basic award data.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar occupational health services procured by other federal agencies?

Benchmarking this $10.8 million contract against similar federal occupational health service contracts requires detailed comparison of service scope, duration, geographic coverage, and specific labor rates or unit costs. Given the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status and time-and-materials pricing, it's challenging to make a direct value-for-money comparison without more granular data. However, the overall value appears fair for a multi-year, comprehensive service offering. A more precise comparison would necessitate accessing contract line item details and market research reports from comparable procurements.

What are the specific risks associated with the time-and-materials (T&M) pricing structure used in this contract?

The primary risk with a Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure is the potential for cost escalation if not rigorously managed. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M contracts reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials. This can lead to higher overall costs for the government if contractor efficiency is low, if labor hours are not carefully tracked, or if material costs are inflated. Effective oversight, detailed reporting of hours and materials, and clear task definitions are essential to mitigate these risks and ensure fair pricing.

What is the expected effectiveness of these occupational health services in supporting the FDA workforce?

The effectiveness of these occupational health services is expected to be high in supporting the FDA workforce by providing essential medical care, preventive screenings, and health management. This contributes to employee well-being, reduces absenteeism due to illness or injury, and ensures that employees meet the health standards required for their roles. By offering these services on-site or through a designated clinic, the FDA can maintain a healthier, more productive workforce, which is critical for its mission-oriented operations. The continuity of these services over the contract period is key to sustained effectiveness.

How has federal spending on occupational health services evolved over the past five years, and where does this contract fit?

Federal spending on occupational health services has generally remained consistent, driven by the ongoing need to support the health and safety of federal employees across numerous agencies. While specific aggregate spending data for this niche category can be difficult to isolate, it represents a stable component of overall healthcare and administrative spending. This $10.8 million contract for the FDA fits within this trend, reflecting a typical investment for a large agency requiring comprehensive occupational health support over a multi-year period. Spending patterns are influenced by agency size, workforce health needs, and regulatory requirements.

What are the implications of the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' award type for government procurement best practices?

The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' (often referred to as sole-source or limited competition) award type signifies a departure from full and open competition, which is generally preferred for maximizing value and fostering innovation. While justified in specific circumstances (e.g., unique capabilities, urgent needs, follow-on work), its use requires careful justification and documentation to ensure it serves the government's best interest. Over-reliance on limited competition can reduce market pressure on pricing and potentially limit the pool of innovative solutions available to agencies. Agencies must adhere to strict regulatory guidelines when utilizing these award types.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Health Care and Social Assistance › Outpatient Care Centers › All Other Outpatient Care Centers

Product/Service Code: MEDICAL SERVICES › GENERAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: RFTOP 1225323

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Cape FOX Corporation

Address: 7050 INFANTRY RIDGE RD, MANASSAS, VA, 20109

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,856,214

Exercised Options: $10,856,214

Current Obligation: $10,856,214

Actual Outlays: $5,252,161

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 75F40119D10029

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline