Department of Labor's $31.6M contract with ODLE MANAGEMENT GROUP for Job Corps Center services shows fair value with 8 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,600,914 ($31.6M)

Contractor: Odle Management Group, L.L.C.

Awarding Agency: Department of Labor

Start Date: 2016-07-01

End Date: 2020-10-31

Contract Duration: 1,583 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF LITTLE ROCK JOB CORPS CENTER

Place of Performance

Location: LITTLE ROCK, PULASKI County, ARKANSAS, 72209

State: Arkansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Labor obligated $31.6 million to ODLE MANAGEMENT GROUP, L.L.C. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF LITTLE ROCK JOB CORPS CENTER Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable given the scope of services for a Job Corps Center. 2. Full and open competition with 8 bidders suggests a healthy market response and potential for competitive pricing. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Incentive Fee) introduces performance-based incentives but also carries inherent cost-reimbursement risks. 4. The duration of the contract (over 4 years) indicates a significant, long-term commitment to service provision. 5. The geographic location in Arkansas is noted, but broader national impact is not detailed. 6. The absence of small business set-aside or subcontracting requirements warrants further investigation into small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $31.6 million over approximately four years for operating a Job Corps Center appears to be within a reasonable range for such services. Benchmarking against similar contracts for Job Corps center operations would provide a more precise assessment of value for money. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structure suggests an attempt to align contractor performance with government objectives, which can be a positive indicator of value if incentives are well-structured and achieved.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that the solicitation was broadly advertised, and multiple responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. The participation of 8 bidders suggests a competitive environment, which typically leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government. The exclusion of sources clause might indicate specific technical requirements or prior performance considerations that narrowed the initial pool but still allowed for broad competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process with 8 bidders generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs through market forces and encouraging efficient service delivery from the winning contractor.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the young adults enrolled in the Job Corps program at the Little Rock Center, who receive vocational training and support services. Services delivered include vocational training, education, job placement assistance, and residential support. The geographic impact is concentrated in Arkansas, serving the local community and economy. Workforce implications include the creation and maintenance of jobs for the contractor's employees operating the center, as well as the development of a skilled workforce through the Job Corps program.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals may limit opportunities for small businesses in the local economy.
The CPIF contract type requires careful monitoring to ensure cost controls and prevent potential overruns.
Performance metrics and incentive targets need rigorous oversight to ensure they effectively drive desired outcomes.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition with 8 bidders indicates a robust and responsive market.
The contract duration suggests a stable operational environment for service delivery.
The focus on vocational training directly addresses workforce development needs.

Sector Analysis

The federal government's investment in Job Corps centers falls under the broader 'Other Technical and Trade Schools' (NAICS 611519) sector, which encompasses institutions providing vocational and technical training. This contract represents a significant portion of spending within this specific service category for the Department of Labor. The market for operating such centers is typically characterized by a mix of non-profit organizations and private companies specializing in education and workforce development. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per student or cost per training hour across different Job Corps centers.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the competition was open to all eligible offerors, including large businesses. While there are no explicit subcontracting requirements mentioned, the absence of a small business set-aside does not preclude the prime contractor from utilizing small businesses. However, it does mean that there is no mandated focus on ensuring small business participation, which could limit subcontracting opportunities for them.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Labor's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management (OASAM) and potentially the Office of Inspector General (OIG). Mechanisms likely include regular performance reviews, financial audits, and site visits to ensure compliance with contract terms and performance standards. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, but detailed operational performance data may be less publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Department of Labor Job Corps Program
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Programs
Federal Vocational Training Grants
Department of Education Career and Technical Education

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs and ensure performance.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals may limit opportunities for small businesses.
Performance metrics and incentive structures need careful monitoring for effectiveness.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Labor awarded $31.6 million to ODLE MANAGEMENT GROUP, L.L.C.. IGF::OT::IGF LITTLE ROCK JOB CORPS CENTER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ODLE MANAGEMENT GROUP, L.L.C..

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 $31.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-07-01. End: 2020-10-31.

What is the historical spending trend for operating the IGF Little Rock Job Corps Center?

The provided data reflects a single definitive contract awarded from July 1, 2016, to October 31, 2020, with a total value of $31,600,914.30. This represents the spending for this specific contract period. To understand historical spending trends, one would need to examine prior contracts for the same center, potentially from different awardees or contract types, and compare them to this period. Analyzing annual spending within this contract's duration would also be necessary. Without data on previous or subsequent contracts, a comprehensive trend analysis is not possible from this single data point.

How does the per-student cost of this contract compare to other Job Corps centers?

The provided data does not include the number of students served or the specific cost breakdown per student. Therefore, a direct comparison of per-student cost to other Job Corps centers cannot be made. To perform such an analysis, one would need enrollment figures, total operational costs, and potentially a breakdown of costs associated with direct student services versus administrative overhead for this center and comparable centers. Benchmarking would require access to these additional metrics across multiple centers.

What specific performance metrics were incentivized under this Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract?

The provided data indicates the contract type as 'COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE' (pt: "COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE") but does not detail the specific performance metrics or incentive targets. Under a CPIF contract, the government and contractor agree on a target cost, a target profit, and a fee incentive formula. The final fee paid is adjusted based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined metrics, which could include student placement rates, graduation rates, cost savings, or quality of training. A thorough review of the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and associated clauses would be necessary to identify these specific incentivized metrics.

What is ODLE MANAGEMENT GROUP, L.L.C.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly in operating Job Corps centers?

The provided data identifies ODLE MANAGEMENT GROUP, L.L.C. as the contractor for this specific Department of Labor contract. To assess their track record, a broader search of federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) would be required to identify all contracts awarded to this entity. This would reveal the number of contracts, their values, agencies involved, contract types, and performance history (e.g., any contract terminations, disputes, or awards for excellence). Information specific to their experience operating Job Corps centers would be a key factor in evaluating their suitability and past performance in this domain.

Were there any significant cost underruns or overruns compared to the target cost in this contract?

The provided data summarizes the total award amount ($31,600,914.30) but does not specify the target cost or the final incurred cost relative to that target. As this is a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract, the final fee paid is directly tied to performance against cost targets. To determine if there were significant underruns or overruns, one would need access to the contract's financial execution data, including the initial target cost, the final negotiated cost, and the resulting fee adjustment. This level of detail is typically found in contract close-out reports or internal agency financial records.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: DOL-ETA-15-R-00049

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Eckerd Youth Alternatives, Inc.

Address: 9937 E BELL RD STE 110, SCOTTSDALE, AZ, 85260

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $51,841,171

Exercised Options: $47,855,245

Current Obligation: $31,600,914

Actual Outlays: $10,615,854

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline