DOE's $32.4M training contract with Chenega Global Services shows limited competition and fair value
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $32,419,040 ($32.4M)
Contractor: Chenega Global Services LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2008-12-24
End Date: 2011-02-15
Contract Duration: 783 days
Daily Burn Rate: $41.4K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT TRAINING AND SUPPORT TO THE NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER IN ALBUQURQUE, NEW MEXICO
Place of Performance
Location: ALBUQUERQUE, BERNALILLO County, NEW MEXICO, 87185
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $32.4 million to CHENEGA GLOBAL SERVICES LLC for work described as: PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT TRAINING AND SUPPORT TO THE NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER IN ALBUQURQUE, NEW MEXICO Key points: 1. The contract's value of $32.4 million over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in professional and management development. 2. Limited competition for this contract may have impacted price discovery and potentially led to less favorable pricing for the government. 3. The cost-plus-award-fee contract type introduces performance incentives but also requires careful oversight to manage costs effectively. 4. The duration of the contract (783 days) indicates a long-term need for these training services at the National Training Center. 5. The specific training provided under this contract is crucial for the operational effectiveness of the National Training Center. 6. The geographic focus on New Mexico highlights the localized impact of this federal spending.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The total award amount of $32.4 million for professional and management development training over approximately two years appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized government training services. However, without specific benchmarks for comparable training programs or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The cost-plus-award-fee structure allows for performance incentives, which can drive quality, but also necessitates robust government oversight to ensure costs remain controlled and justified.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not openly competed. This significantly limits the opportunity for multiple vendors to bid, which can reduce price competition and potentially lead to higher costs for the government. The rationale for a sole-source award, if documented, would be critical to understanding why full and open competition was not pursued.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be receiving the best possible price due to the absence of competitive bidding. This can result in a less efficient use of public funds.
Public Impact
The National Training Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, is the primary beneficiary, receiving essential professional and management development training. The services delivered enhance the skills and capabilities of personnel at the training center, contributing to its overall mission effectiveness. The geographic impact is concentrated in New Mexico, supporting local operations and potentially local personnel development. Workforce implications include the development of federal employees and potentially contractors through specialized training programs.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition may have led to inflated costs.
- Sole-source awards can reduce transparency and accountability.
- Cost-plus-award-fee contracts require diligent government oversight to prevent cost overruns.
Positive Signals
- Contract supports critical training needs for a national facility.
- Awardee has a contract to fulfill specific training requirements.
- The training provided aims to improve management and professional skills.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on training and development. The market for government training services is diverse, with many providers offering specialized programs. Benchmarking this contract's value against similar large-scale, long-term training initiatives for federal agencies would provide further context on its cost-effectiveness. The Department of Energy's investment reflects the importance of continuous professional development for its personnel.
Small Business Impact
Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not available for this contract. As it was awarded on a sole-source basis, the typical mechanisms for engaging small businesses through competition or subcontracting goals may not have been applied. Further investigation into the awardee's subcontracting practices would be necessary to assess any impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy contracting officers and program managers. The cost-plus-award-fee structure necessitates close monitoring of performance and costs to ensure the government receives the intended value. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Workforce Training Programs
- Professional Development Services
- Management Training Contracts
- Department of Energy Training Initiatives
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award limits competition.
- Cost-plus-award-fee requires robust oversight.
- Lack of detailed performance data hinders full value assessment.
Tags
professional-services, management-training, department-of-energy, national-training-center, albuquerque, new-mexico, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, sole-source, large-contract, training-and-development
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $32.4 million to CHENEGA GLOBAL SERVICES LLC. PROFESSIONAL AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT TRAINING AND SUPPORT TO THE NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER IN ALBUQURQUE, NEW MEXICO
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CHENEGA GLOBAL SERVICES LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $32.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-12-24. End: 2011-02-15.
What specific types of professional and management development training were provided under this contract?
The contract data indicates 'Professional and Management Development Training and Support to the National Training Center'. While specific course titles or curricula are not detailed in the provided summary, this typically encompasses leadership development, project management, technical skills enhancement, and compliance training tailored to the needs of the National Training Center's personnel. The 'support' aspect may also include logistical arrangements, material development, and evaluation of training effectiveness. A deeper dive into the contract's statement of work would reveal the precise training modules and objectives.
How does the $32.4 million contract value compare to similar training contracts awarded by the Department of Energy or other federal agencies?
Comparing the $32.4 million total award to similar contracts requires access to a broader dataset of federal procurement. However, for a contract spanning approximately two years (783 days, from Dec 2008 to Feb 2011), this represents a substantial investment. Large-scale, long-term training contracts for specialized government facilities can range significantly based on the complexity of training, number of personnel, and duration. Without specific comparable contracts for similar training at comparable facilities, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents high or low spending. The sole-source nature also suggests that competitive pricing benchmarks may not be applicable.
What were the key performance metrics and award fee criteria used for Chenega Global Services under this contract?
The contract type is 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF), which means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus an award fee based on performance against pre-defined criteria. While the specific metrics are not detailed in the provided data, typical CPAF criteria for training contracts include trainee satisfaction, achievement of learning objectives, adherence to schedule, quality of training materials, and overall effectiveness in enhancing workforce capabilities. The government would have established a detailed performance plan outlining these metrics and the associated fee structure. The 'award' portion implies that the contractor could earn additional profit if performance exceeded expectations.
What is the historical spending pattern for professional and management development training at the National Training Center?
The provided data only covers a single contract awarded to Chenega Global Services from late 2008 to early 2011. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to examine procurement data for the National Training Center over a longer period, looking at all training-related contracts, their values, durations, and awardees. This would reveal trends in spending, identify key contractors, and highlight any shifts in the types or volume of training procured. Without this broader historical context, it's impossible to assess if the $32.4 million award represents a typical, increased, or decreased level of investment.
What is the track record of Chenega Global Services in providing federal training services, particularly for agencies like the Department of Energy?
Chenega Global Services is a known entity in federal contracting, often providing a range of services including logistics, security, and professional support. Their track record in delivering training services would need to be assessed through contract performance reports (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), past performance evaluations, and any publicly available information on their project successes and challenges. For this specific contract, the CPAF structure suggests performance was evaluated, but the details of that evaluation are not provided. A comprehensive review would involve looking at their portfolio of training contracts across various agencies.
Were there any identified risks or concerns associated with this contract during its performance period?
The primary risk associated with this contract, given its sole-source nature and CPAF structure, would be the potential for cost inefficiencies and a lack of competitive pressure on pricing. Sole-source awards inherently carry a risk of not achieving the best possible value for taxpayer dollars. CPAF contracts require diligent government oversight to ensure that award fees are earned based on genuine performance improvements and not just cost accumulation. Without access to performance reviews or IG reports related to this specific contract, it's difficult to identify any specific operational or performance-related risks that may have materialized during its execution.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Educational Services › Business Schools and Computer and Management Training › Professional and Management Development Training
Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: THE Chenega Corporation (UEI: 622692994)
Address: 726 EAST 9TH AVENUE, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99501
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $35,519,040
Exercised Options: $35,519,040
Current Obligation: $32,419,040
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-12-24
Current End Date: 2011-02-15
Potential End Date: 2019-10-21 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-10-23
More Contracts from Chenega Global Services LLC
- Facility Support Services and Safety and Security Training AT the National Training Center (NTC) in Albuquerque, NEW Mexico. the NTC Operates Several Training Facilities on Kirtland AIR Force Base, in Albuquerque, NEW Mexico. NTC Facilities Include the Main Campus, the Live Fire Range (LFR), and the Integrated Safety and Security Training and Evaluation Complex (isstec).in Addition to the Security Training, the Contractor IS Responsible for Daily Operations and Maintenance of the NTC. the NTC Facility Support Services Requirement Covers NOT Only the Support of the Grounds and Facilities of the NTC, BUT Also Maintenance of Real Property and Property Management, Such AS the Large NTC Vehicle Fleet and Firearms Arsenal. the Contractor Support IS Responsible for the Maintenance of DOE Property and for ALL Required Certification Programs — $58.8M (Department of Energy)
- Operation and Maintenance Services — $12.9M (Environmental Protection Agency)
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)