Bridge contract for Atterbury JJC awarded to Adams and Associates Inc. for $7.85M

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,993,484 ($31.0M)

Contractor: Adams and Associates Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Labor

Start Date: 2015-11-30

End Date: 2017-11-30

Contract Duration: 731 days

Daily Burn Rate: $42.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF ATTERBURY JCC BRIDGE CONTRACT. THIS IS A BRIDGE CONTRACT FOR THE ATTERUBRY JJC STARTING 12/1/15 THROUGH 05/31/16. THIS REQUISITION GIVES FUNDS AVAILABLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,847,175 IN CENTER OPERATIONS THROUGH THE PERIOD ENDING 5/31/2016.

Place of Performance

Location: EDINBURGH, JOHNSON County, INDIANA, 46124

State: Indiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Labor obligated $31.0 million to ADAMS AND ASSOCIATES INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF ATTERBURY JCC BRIDGE CONTRACT. THIS IS A BRIDGE CONTRACT FOR THE ATTERUBRY JJC STARTING 12/1/15 THROUGH 05/31/16. THIS REQUISITION GIVES FUNDS AVAILABLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,847,175 IN CENTER OPERATIONS THROUGH THE PERIOD ENDING 5/31/2016. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for bridge services to maintain operations. 2. Funding allocated for the period ending May 31, 2016. 3. Contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee. 4. No competition was utilized for this award. 5. The contract duration is 731 days. 6. The base award amount is $4.24M, with a total obligated amount of $30.99M.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value is difficult to assess without a competitive benchmark. The obligated amount of $30.99M significantly exceeds the base award of $4.24M, suggesting substantial cost growth or scope changes. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure necessitates close monitoring to ensure cost efficiency and prevent overruns.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source award. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to explore alternative solutions or secure the best possible pricing. It is unclear why full and open competition was not pursued.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the best value due to the absence of competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple offers had been considered.

Public Impact

The contract supports operations at the Atterbury JJC. Services are delivered in Indiana. The contract ensures continuity of essential functions. The workforce implications are tied to the operational needs of the JJC.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about price reasonableness.
Significant difference between base award and obligated amount warrants scrutiny.
Cost Plus Incentive Fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed effectively.

Positive Signals

Contract ensures continued operations at a key facility.
Funding is allocated through a specific period, providing budget clarity.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the 'Other Technical and Trade Schools' NAICS code (611519), which is a niche sector. Benchmarking is challenging without more specific data on comparable educational or vocational training facility support contracts. The total obligated amount suggests a significant operational support requirement.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication of small business set-aside or subcontracting requirements in the provided data. Further investigation would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved in any capacity.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. Given the sole-source nature and the significant obligated amount, robust oversight by the Department of Labor and potentially an Inspector General would be crucial to ensure accountability and prevent waste.

Related Government Programs

Department of Labor Operations Support
JJC Facility Management
Vocational Training Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Cost Overruns (CPIF)
Significant Obligated Amount vs. Base Award

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Labor awarded $31.0 million to ADAMS AND ASSOCIATES INC. IGF::OT::IGF ATTERBURY JCC BRIDGE CONTRACT. THIS IS A BRIDGE CONTRACT FOR THE ATTERUBRY JJC STARTING 12/1/15 THROUGH 05/31/16. THIS REQUISITION GIVES FUNDS AVAILABLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,847,175 IN CENTER OPERATIONS THROUGH THE PERIOD ENDING 5/31/2016.

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 $31.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-11-30. End: 2017-11-30.

What is the specific nature of the 'bridge contract' and why was it necessary?

A 'bridge contract' is typically used to extend or continue services when a new contract is being procured or when there is an urgent need that cannot wait for a full procurement cycle. In this case, the contract for the Atterbury JJC was likely a bridge to ensure continuity of operations from December 1, 2015, through May 31, 2016, while a more permanent solution or a new contract was being finalized. The necessity often arises from unforeseen delays in the procurement process, changes in requirements, or the expiration of a previous contract without a successor ready.

What factors contributed to the significant increase from the base award ($4.24M) to the total obligated amount ($30.99M)?

The substantial difference between the base award and the total obligated amount for this Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract suggests significant scope expansion, cost overruns, or the exercise of contract options. Cost Plus Incentive Fee contracts are designed to share risks and rewards between the government and the contractor, with the final price influenced by performance against targets. It is possible that the initial base award was a placeholder or a minimum guarantee, and the actual costs incurred, plus incentives, led to the higher obligated amount. Detailed contract modifications, performance reports, and financial audits would be necessary to fully understand the drivers of this increase.

What are the risks associated with a sole-source Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract of this magnitude?

Sole-source contracts inherently carry a higher risk of non-competitive pricing, meaning the government may pay more than it would in a competitive environment. When combined with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structure, the risks are amplified. CPIF contracts can incentivize contractors to incur costs, as a portion of those costs are reimbursed, and the incentive fee is tied to performance metrics. Without robust oversight and clearly defined, achievable targets, there's a risk of cost escalation and potential for the contractor to prioritize earning fees over strict cost control. The lack of competition means there's no external market pressure to drive efficiency.

What is the historical spending pattern for services at the Atterbury JJC, and how does this contract compare?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for the Atterbury JJC. To conduct a comparative analysis, one would need to access previous contract awards for similar services at this facility or comparable facilities. Understanding past spending would help determine if the $30.99M obligated amount is an anomaly, an escalation due to inflation or increased scope, or consistent with previous investments. Without this context, it's difficult to assess if this contract represents a significant deviation from historical norms.

What specific services are being provided under this contract, and what is their impact on the JJC's mission?

The data indicates this is a 'bridge contract for the Atterbury JJC' and provides funds for 'Center Operations.' While specific services are not detailed, 'Center Operations' typically encompass a broad range of activities necessary for the functioning of an educational or vocational facility. This could include facility maintenance, administrative support, logistical services, and potentially direct support for training programs. The impact on the JJC's mission is likely one of continuity, ensuring that essential functions are maintained without interruption, thereby supporting the delivery of training and services to its students or participants.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

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: $30,993,484

Exercised Options: $30,993,484

Current Obligation: $30,993,484

Actual Outlays: $-60,770

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline