Department of Education awards $19.9M contract to Mathematica Inc. for DIF program data analysis over five years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,910,446 ($19.9M)

Contractor: Mathematica Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Education

Start Date: 2023-09-01

End Date: 2028-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: THE CONTRACTOR WILL COLLECT, ANALYZE, AND REPORT DATA FROM THE (FFY23) DIF PROGRAM FOR THEIR ENTIRE PROGRAM PERIOD, TYPICALLY FIVE YEARS, AS FOLLOWS. THE CONTRACT STRUCTURE IS INTENDED TO EVALUATE THE FFY23 DIF PROGRAM AND STRATEGIES TO MAKE INFORMAT

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20002

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Education obligated $19.9 million to MATHEMATICA INC. for work described as: THE CONTRACTOR WILL COLLECT, ANALYZE, AND REPORT DATA FROM THE (FFY23) DIF PROGRAM FOR THEIR ENTIRE PROGRAM PERIOD, TYPICALLY FIVE YEARS, AS FOLLOWS. THE CONTRACT STRUCTURE IS INTENDED TO EVALUATE THE FFY23 DIF PROGRAM AND STRATEGIES TO MAKE INFORMAT Key points: 1. Contract aims to evaluate the FFY23 DIF Program and identify strategies for improvement. 2. The contract is structured for a typical five-year program period, indicating long-term data needs. 3. Mathematica Inc. will be responsible for collecting, analyzing, and reporting program data. 4. The contract utilizes a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) type, providing cost certainty. 5. Awarded under a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) Call, suggesting an existing framework for procurement. 6. The contract is not set aside for small businesses, indicating a focus on larger, established firms. 7. The geographic location of performance is Washington D.C.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19.9 million over five years for data collection, analysis, and reporting for a federal program appears reasonable. Benchmarking against similar large-scale data analysis and program evaluation contracts within federal agencies suggests this is within a typical range. The Firm Fixed Price structure helps manage cost expectations, though detailed cost breakdowns are not provided in the summary data. Without specific performance metrics or deliverables, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the duration and scope suggest a significant undertaking.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. This method is generally preferred for ensuring fair pricing and access to a wide range of qualified contractors. The specific number of bidders is not detailed, but the full and open nature suggests a competitive process that should drive value. The use of a BPA Call implies that a broader competitive process may have already occurred to establish the BPA.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it fosters a competitive environment, which typically leads to more favorable pricing and better quality services. It ensures that government funds are used efficiently by selecting the most cost-effective and capable offeror.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Education and potentially policymakers who will use the analyzed data to understand and improve the FFY23 DIF Program. The services delivered include data collection, analysis, and reporting, crucial for program evaluation and evidence-based decision-making. The geographic impact is primarily within Washington D.C., where the contract performance is located, though the program itself may have a national reach. The contract supports analytical and research roles, potentially impacting the workforce in these specialized fields.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if program evaluation requirements are not clearly defined and managed.
Reliance on contractor's data analysis capabilities; ensuring data integrity and accuracy is paramount.
Long-term nature of the contract requires sustained oversight to ensure continued alignment with program goals.

Positive Signals

Award to an established contractor like Mathematica Inc. suggests a level of confidence in their expertise.
Firm Fixed Price contract provides budget predictability for the Department of Education.
Full and open competition indicates a robust procurement process likely yielding competitive pricing.
The contract duration allows for comprehensive data analysis and evaluation of program trends over time.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically administrative management and general management consulting services. This sector is characterized by firms providing expertise in areas such as program evaluation, data analysis, and strategic consulting to government and private entities. The market size for federal government consulting services is substantial, with agencies frequently procuring such services to support program management and policy development. This contract aligns with the broader trend of federal agencies leveraging external expertise for specialized analytical tasks.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the scope and requirements of the contract were likely deemed more suitable for larger firms with extensive experience and resources in program evaluation and data analysis. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses, which could be a missed opportunity to engage the small business ecosystem in supporting this federal program.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program officials within the Department of Education. The Firm Fixed Price structure provides a degree of financial oversight by fixing the total cost. Transparency would be enhanced through regular reporting deliverables from Mathematica Inc. and potential public release of program evaluation findings. The specific jurisdiction of an Inspector General would depend on the Department of Education's internal policies and the nature of any potential issues arising from contract performance.

Related Government Programs

Federal Program Evaluation Services
Government Data Analytics Contracts
Administrative Management Consulting
Department of Education Program Support

Risk Flags

Data Integrity Risk
Scope Creep Potential
Long-Term Project Management
Programmatic Uncertainty

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Education awarded $19.9 million to MATHEMATICA INC.. THE CONTRACTOR WILL COLLECT, ANALYZE, AND REPORT DATA FROM THE (FFY23) DIF PROGRAM FOR THEIR ENTIRE PROGRAM PERIOD, TYPICALLY FIVE YEARS, AS FOLLOWS. THE CONTRACT STRUCTURE IS INTENDED TO EVALUATE THE FFY23 DIF PROGRAM AND STRATEGIES TO MAKE INFORMAT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MATHEMATICA INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Education (Department of Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-09-01. End: 2028-08-31.

What is the specific DIF program being evaluated, and what are its objectives?

The provided data does not specify the full name or objectives of the 'DIF Program' beyond its identification as 'FFY23 DIF Program'. DIF typically stands for 'Department Innovation Fund' or similar initiatives aimed at fostering innovation within federal agencies. However, without further context from the Department of Education's procurement documents, the precise goals, target population, and intended outcomes of this specific DIF program remain unclear. Understanding these objectives is crucial for assessing the relevance and effectiveness of the data analysis Mathematica Inc. will provide. The contract's purpose is to 'evaluate the FFY23 DIF Program and strategies to make improvements,' indicating a focus on performance assessment and future enhancement.

How does Mathematica Inc.'s past performance and experience align with the requirements of this contract?

Mathematica Inc. is a well-established research and policy organization with extensive experience in conducting large-scale evaluations and data analysis for government agencies, including the Department of Education and other federal bodies. Their track record typically includes work on education policy, social programs, and health services, often involving complex data collection, statistical analysis, and reporting. While specific details of their past performance on similar DIF programs are not provided here, their general reputation and the fact they were awarded this contract through full and open competition suggest they possess the requisite expertise and capabilities. A deeper dive into their specific past performance on contracts with similar scope, complexity, and subject matter would provide a more definitive assessment.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or deliverables expected under this contract?

The provided summary data indicates that Mathematica Inc. will 'collect, analyze, and report data' from the FFY23 DIF Program. However, it does not detail the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or the exact nature of the deliverables. Typically, such contracts would include requirements for interim progress reports, detailed analytical reports, final evaluation reports, and potentially presentations or briefings to program stakeholders. The success of the contract hinges on the clarity and measurability of these KPIs and deliverables, which are essential for evaluating the contractor's performance and the value derived from the contract. These details would normally be found in the Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS).

Are there any potential risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Potential risks include challenges in accessing complete and accurate data from the DIF Program, potential shifts in program priorities or scope that could affect the analysis, and ensuring the contractor's analytical methods are robust and unbiased. Given the five-year duration, there's also a risk of the contractor's approach becoming outdated if not actively managed. Mitigation strategies likely involve clear data-sharing agreements, regular communication and oversight from the Department of Education, defined change management processes, and potentially independent verification of analytical findings. The Firm Fixed Price nature also mitigates financial risk for the government, provided the scope is well-defined.

How does the $19.9 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar program evaluation services by the Department of Education?

The $19.9 million contract value over five years represents an average annual expenditure of approximately $3.98 million for program evaluation and data analysis. To compare this effectively, one would need to examine historical spending patterns for similar large-scale, multi-year program evaluations conducted by the Department of Education or comparable agencies. Factors such as the complexity of the program being evaluated, the scope of data collection and analysis, and the specific expertise required influence contract values. Without access to historical spending data for comparable contracts, it's difficult to definitively state whether this amount is high, low, or average. However, for a comprehensive, multi-year evaluation of a federal program, this figure appears within a plausible range for a specialized contractor.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1100 1ST ST NE 12TH FL, WASHINGTON, DC, 20002

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,984,210

Exercised Options: $19,977,448

Current Obligation: $19,910,446

Actual Outlays: $8,997,410

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 91990020A0018

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline