Sole-source contract for technical and trade schools awarded to Adams and Associates Inc. for $33.1M

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $33,077,418 ($33.1M)

Contractor: Adams and Associates Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Labor

Start Date: 2015-11-01

End Date: 2018-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,156 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF WOODLAND JCC SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT

Place of Performance

Location: LAUREL, ANNE ARUNDEL County, MARYLAND, 20724

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Labor obligated $33.1 million to ADAMS AND ASSOCIATES INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF WOODLAND JCC SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting competitive opportunities. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), which can incentivize cost control but also carries inherent risk. 3. The duration of the contract is 1156 days, indicating a long-term commitment. 4. The contract is for services categorized under 'Other Technical and Trade Schools' (NAICS 611519). 5. The award was made by the Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management. 6. The contract value is substantial at over $33 million.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value for this specific sole-source contract is challenging due to the lack of competitive bids. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure requires careful monitoring to ensure costs remain reasonable and that the incentives align with government objectives. Without comparable contracts or market data, assessing whether the $33.1 million represents a fair price is difficult. The absence of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing or suboptimal service delivery.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This approach bypasses the standard procurement process where multiple vendors would submit proposals, allowing for price and performance comparisons. The rationale for a sole-source award typically involves unique capabilities or circumstances, but it significantly reduces the government's ability to leverage market competition to achieve the best value.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit taxpayer benefit by foregoing the potential for lower prices and improved terms that competition typically generates. This can lead to higher overall spending for the government.

Public Impact

The contract likely supports workforce development or specialized training programs managed by the Department of Labor. Beneficiaries could include individuals seeking technical or trade skills relevant to specific industries. The services delivered are related to educational and training institutions. The geographic impact is likely concentrated in Maryland, where the contract is registered, but could extend nationally depending on program reach.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price discovery and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Cost Plus Incentive Fee contracts require robust oversight to manage costs and ensure performance.
Lack of competition may reduce the incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve service quality over time.

Positive Signals

The contract addresses a specific need within the Department of Labor's purview.
The long duration suggests a stable, ongoing requirement for the services provided.
The CPIF structure, if managed effectively, can align contractor and government interests towards achieving specific performance goals.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the broader education and training services sector, specifically focusing on technical and trade schools. This sector is crucial for workforce development and equipping individuals with specialized skills. The market for such services can be diverse, ranging from large educational institutions to specialized training providers. Benchmarking this contract's value is difficult without specific details on the training provided and comparable market rates for similar sole-source procurements.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (SS: false, SB: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a small business set-aside. The prime contractor, Adams and Associates Inc., is not specified as a small business in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Labor's contracting and program management offices. The Inspector General's office may also conduct audits or investigations into contract performance and financial management. Transparency is dependent on the agency's reporting practices and the public availability of contract details beyond what is provided.

Related Government Programs

Department of Labor Training Programs
Federal Workforce Development Initiatives
Vocational Education Contracts
Technical Skills Training

Risk Flags

Sole-source award may indicate a lack of market research or justification.
Cost Plus Incentive Fee contracts require diligent oversight to ensure value for money.
Absence of competition limits price discovery and potential savings.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Labor awarded $33.1 million to ADAMS AND ASSOCIATES INC. IGF::OT::IGF WOODLAND JCC SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ADAMS AND ASSOCIATES INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Labor (Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $33.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-11-01. End: 2018-12-31.

What specific technical and trade school services does Adams and Associates Inc. provide under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 611519, 'Other Technical and Trade Schools.' This suggests the services likely involve providing specialized vocational or technical training, potentially in fields relevant to the Department of Labor's mission, such as job training, apprenticeships, or specific skill development programs. Without further details on the contract's statement of work, the exact nature of the training, curriculum, or target student population remains unspecified. The 'ADAMS AND ASSOCIATES INC' entity suggests a focus on administrative or support services related to educational programs, or potentially direct provision of training.

What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The justification for a sole-source award is not provided in the data. Typically, sole-source contracts are justified when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services, often due to unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or urgent and compelling circumstances. For a contract in the 'Other Technical and Trade Schools' category, potential justifications could include highly specialized curriculum, unique training facilities, or a pre-existing relationship where the contractor has demonstrated exceptional performance and is the only viable option. However, without the official justification document (e.g., a Justification and Approval - J&A), this remains speculative.

How does the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structure work for this contract, and what are the potential risks?

A Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract is a type of cost-reimbursement contract where the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs and also receives an incentive fee based on meeting predetermined performance targets. For this contract, the government and Adams and Associates Inc. would have agreed on target costs, target fees, and a sharing formula for cost savings or overruns. The incentive fee would be paid if the contractor achieves certain objectives, such as completing training within budget, meeting specific completion rates, or achieving certain job placement metrics. The primary risk is that CPIF contracts can be complex to administer and require careful negotiation of targets. If targets are set too low, the government might overpay. Conversely, if targets are too high or unattainable, the incentive may be ineffective. There's also a risk that the focus on meeting targets could lead to cutting corners on quality if not properly monitored.

What is the historical spending pattern for this specific service or contractor with the Department of Labor?

The provided data represents a single definitive contract awarded from November 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018, with a total value of $33,077,418. This data point alone does not provide a comprehensive historical spending pattern. To establish a pattern, one would need to analyze prior contracts awarded to Adams and Associates Inc. by the Department of Labor for similar services, as well as other contracts awarded by the Department of Labor for technical and trade school services. Without access to historical contract databases or agency procurement records, it's impossible to determine if this $33.1 million award represents an increase, decrease, or consistent level of spending for this type of service or contractor.

Are there any performance concerns or positive performance indicators associated with Adams and Associates Inc. on this contract?

The provided data does not include specific performance metrics, awards, or debarments related to Adams and Associates Inc. for this contract. Performance indicators would typically be found in contract performance reports, CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) records, or agency evaluations. The fact that it's a sole-source award might suggest a history of satisfactory performance or a unique capability, but this is not explicitly stated. Without access to these detailed performance records, assessing positive or negative indicators is not possible based solely on the contract award data.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Technical and Trade Schools › Other Technical and Trade Schools

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: DOLETA16C0005

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10395 DOUBLE R BLVD, RENO, NV, 89521

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,077,418

Exercised Options: $33,077,418

Current Obligation: $33,077,418

Actual Outlays: $3,144,667

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline