Department of Energy's $17M contract for technical and management support services awarded to DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,050,181 ($17.1M)

Contractor: Deltha-Critique Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2006-11-01

End Date: 2011-10-31

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: THE TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES CONTRACTOR PROVIDES FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS; BUDGET FORMULATION AND EXECUTION SUPPORT; PROJECT REPORTS, COST AND SCHEDULE CONTROLS; INTEGRATION OF APPRAISAL AND AUDIT INFORMATION; ANALYSIS OF SCHEDULING AND DOCUMENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; INTEGRATION AND DOCUMENTATION OF SECURITY AND EMERGENCY PROGRAM PROCEDURES; MAIL AND WORD PROCESSING; REPRODUCTION; GRAPHICS; ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION OF SPECIAL STUDIES; AND IT IMPLEMENTATION OF SPR DATA SYSTEMS.

Place of Performance

Location: NEW ORLEANS, JEFFERSON County, LOUISIANA, 70123

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $17.1 million to DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE for work described as: THE TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES CONTRACTOR PROVIDES FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS; BUDGET FORMULATION AND EXECUTION SUPPORT; PROJECT REPORTS, COST AND SCHEDULE CONTROLS; INTEGRATION OF APPRAISAL AND AUDIT INFORMATION; ANALYSIS OF SCHEDULING AND DOCUMENTATION AND… Key points: 1. The contract encompasses a broad range of financial, management, and IT support services, indicating a significant reliance on external expertise for critical functions. 2. Services include budget formulation, project reporting, cost and schedule controls, and IT implementation, suggesting a need for specialized analytical and administrative capabilities. 3. The contract's duration of 1825 days (5 years) points to a long-term need for these support services within the Department of Energy. 4. The award was made under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' suggesting a competitive process but with specific criteria for participation. 5. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type implies that contractor performance directly influences the fee earned, incentivizing high-quality service delivery. 6. The contract's value of over $17 million over five years suggests a substantial investment in maintaining operational efficiency and analytical capacity.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $17 million over five years, averaging around $3.4 million annually, appears reasonable for the extensive scope of technical and management support services provided. While specific benchmarking data for this exact combination of services is not readily available, the services described (financial analysis, budget support, IT implementation) are common within government agencies. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure allows for performance-based adjustments to the fee, which can be a mechanism for ensuring value for money if managed effectively. Without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar sole-source contracts, a definitive value assessment is challenging, but the competitive award suggests a baseline for fair pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This indicates that while the competition was open, there were specific criteria or exclusions applied, which could limit the pool of potential bidders. The presence of two bidders suggests a moderately competitive environment. The 'exclusion of sources' aspect warrants further investigation to understand if it unduly restricted competition or was based on legitimate technical requirements. A higher number of bidders typically leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of the award, even with exclusions, likely provided the Department of Energy with a reasonable range of pricing and service offerings. However, understanding the specific exclusions is key to determining if taxpayers received the best possible value.

Public Impact

The Department of Energy benefits from enhanced financial and management analysis, supporting informed decision-making and efficient resource allocation. The contract facilitates improved budget formulation and execution, ensuring funds are managed effectively across departmental programs. Project reports, cost, and schedule controls contribute to better project oversight and timely completion of initiatives. Integration of appraisal, audit, security, and emergency program procedures enhances overall operational integrity and safety. IT implementation support ensures that data systems are up-to-date and functional, supporting the agency's technological infrastructure. The workforce benefits from streamlined administrative processes and access to specialized analytical support, allowing them to focus on core mission objectives.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure, while incentivizing performance, can lead to higher costs if not carefully monitored and managed, as the contractor is reimbursed for costs plus a fee that can increase with performance.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition process, if not well-justified, could limit the number of potential bidders and potentially reduce competitive pressure on pricing.
The broad scope of services could lead to potential challenges in oversight and ensuring accountability across all contracted functions.
Reliance on a single contractor for such a wide array of critical support functions could pose a risk if the contractor experiences performance issues or financial instability.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded through a competitive process, suggesting that multiple entities vied for the opportunity, which generally leads to better value.
The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) structure incentivizes the contractor to perform well, as a portion of their compensation is tied to meeting or exceeding performance standards.
The long-term nature of the contract (5 years) indicates a stable and ongoing need for these services, providing continuity for the Department of Energy's operations.
The contractor, DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE, is tasked with a comprehensive set of services, indicating a capability to handle complex support requirements.
The contract is managed by the Department of Energy, a major federal agency with established oversight mechanisms for its contracts.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on management and financial consulting. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services to support its vast operations, policy development, and program management. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous large and small businesses offering expertise in areas like financial analysis, budget management, and IT integration. The Department of Energy's spending in this area is consistent with the need for specialized support to manage complex energy-related programs and infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the average cost of similar support contracts across various federal agencies for similar service scopes and durations.

Small Business Impact

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' and does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions. The contractor, DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE, is a joint venture, which may involve small businesses as partners. However, without further information on the joint venture's composition, its direct impact on small business subcontracting is unclear. If the joint venture itself is considered a small business, it would be a significant award for that entity. If it's a large business joint venture, the lack of explicit subcontracting goals for small businesses could mean limited opportunities for them on this specific contract.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the Department of Energy, which has established procurement regulations and oversight procedures. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) structure inherently requires robust performance monitoring to determine the award fee. Oversight would likely involve regular performance reviews, progress reports, and potentially site visits. Accountability measures are tied to the contractor's ability to meet performance standards outlined in the contract. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics and fee determinations may not always be publicly disclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any issues of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Department of Energy Financial Management Support
Federal Budget Formulation and Execution Services
Government IT Implementation Contracts
Management and Technical Consulting Services
Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
Contracting for Administrative Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure
Limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources'
Oversight challenges with broad service scope
Dependence on single contractor for critical functions

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $17.1 million to DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE. THE TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES CONTRACTOR PROVIDES FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS; BUDGET FORMULATION AND EXECUTION SUPPORT; PROJECT REPORTS, COST AND SCHEDULE CONTROLS; INTEGRATION OF APPRAISAL AND AUDIT INFORMATION; ANALYSIS OF SCHEDULING AND DOCUMENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; INTEGRATION AND DOCUMENTATION OF SECURITY AND EMERGENCY PROGRAM PROCEDURES; MAIL AND WORD PROCESSING; REPRODUCTION; GRAPHICS; ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION OF SPECIAL STUDIES; AN

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $17.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-11-01. End: 2011-10-31.

What is the track record of DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE with the Department of Energy and other federal agencies?

Information regarding the specific track record of DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE is not detailed in the provided data. As a joint venture, its performance history would depend on the constituent companies and their prior experience. Federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) would typically contain records of past performance, including contract awards, performance evaluations, and any disputes or terminations. A thorough review of these sources would be necessary to assess their past performance, reliability, and experience in delivering similar technical and management support services to the Department of Energy or other agencies. Understanding their history with CPAF contracts would also be crucial.

How does the annual cost of this contract compare to similar support services procured by other federal agencies?

The annual cost of this contract averages approximately $3.4 million ($17,050,181.04 / 5 years). Benchmarking this against similar contracts requires access to a broader dataset of federal procurements for technical and management support services. Factors such as the specific services included, the complexity of the agency's mission, geographic location, and the level of competition significantly influence pricing. Without a direct comparison of contracts with identical scopes and durations, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a high or low cost. However, the 'full and open competition' aspect suggests that the pricing was vetted against market alternatives at the time of award.

What are the primary risks associated with the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type for this specific service?

The primary risk with a CPAF contract for these services is the potential for cost overruns if the award fee criteria are not tightly defined and rigorously monitored. While CPAF incentivizes performance, it can also lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts because the government reimburses all allowable costs plus a fee that can escalate based on performance. For technical and management support services, defining objective and measurable performance standards for the award fee can be challenging. If not managed diligently, the government might end up paying a higher fee than warranted, or the contractor might focus on achieving fee targets rather than the most cost-effective service delivery.

How effective has the Department of Energy been in managing similar large-scale support service contracts?

The effectiveness of the Department of Energy (DOE) in managing large-scale support service contracts is a broad question that would require a detailed analysis of numerous contracts and their outcomes. The DOE manages a vast and complex portfolio of programs, often requiring significant contractor support. Historically, large federal agencies like the DOE face challenges in contract management, including ensuring adequate oversight, managing scope creep, and verifying contractor performance. The success of this specific contract would depend on the DOE's program managers' diligence in overseeing DELTHA-CRITIQUE JOINT VENTURE's performance against the CPAF criteria and the overall contract requirements. Reviews by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or the DOE's Inspector General could provide insights into their contract management effectiveness.

What has been the historical spending trend for technical and management support services at the Department of Energy?

The provided data only details one specific contract. To understand historical spending trends for technical and management support services at the Department of Energy, one would need to analyze procurement data over several fiscal years. This would involve querying databases like FPDS or USAspending.gov for contracts categorized under relevant NAICS codes (like 541611 - Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services, or 541110 - Offices of Lawyers, though the latter is less likely for this scope) and service types. Analyzing these trends would reveal whether spending in this category has increased, decreased, or remained stable, and identify major contractors and contract types utilized.

What is the significance of the 'exclusion of sources' clause in the contract's competition method?

The 'exclusion of sources' clause in 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' means that while the competition was generally open, certain potential sources were specifically excluded from bidding. This exclusion must be justified by the agency, typically based on factors like unique capabilities, prior experience, or specific technical requirements that only a limited number of entities can meet. The significance lies in its potential impact on competition. If the exclusions are narrow and well-justified, it might still result in robust competition among qualified bidders. However, if the exclusions are broad or poorly justified, it could artificially limit the bidder pool, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced innovation, thereby not fully serving the taxpayers' interests.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Office Administrative Services › Office Administrative Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3520 GEN DGAULLE DR 506, NEW ORLEANS, LA, 02

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,050,181

Exercised Options: $17,050,181

Current Obligation: $17,050,181

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline