Labor Department's $15.4M Apprenticeship Training Contract Awarded to Transportation Communications Union/IAM

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,392,464 ($15.4M)

Contractor: Transportation Communications Union/Iam

Awarding Agency: Department of Labor

Start Date: 2004-08-01

End Date: 2011-09-21

Contract Duration: 2,607 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: AWARD

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20210

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Labor obligated $15.4 million to TRANSPORTATION COMMUNICATIONS UNION/IAM for work described as: AWARD Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a cost-plus-fixed-fee basis, indicating potential for cost overruns. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential value for money. 3. Long contract duration of 2607 days suggests a need for ongoing services. 4. The award was made to a single entity, limiting price discovery. 5. The contract falls under the 'Apprenticeship Training' category, vital for workforce development. 6. No small business set-aside was indicated, potentially limiting small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging due to the lack of competitive bidding and the nature of cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts. Without comparable bids, it's difficult to ascertain if the pricing reflects market rates or if it represents a fair value for the services rendered. The fixed fee component provides some cost control, but the overall cost is subject to the actual expenses incurred by the contractor.

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 among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required goods or services, or in specific circumstances where competition is not feasible or advantageous. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for price negotiation through a bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. It also limits the government's ability to explore innovative solutions from a wider range of providers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are likely members of the Transportation Communications Union/IAM, who would receive apprenticeship training. The services delivered focus on apprenticeship training, aiming to develop skilled workers in relevant industries. The contract is geographically focused on the District of Columbia (DC). This contract has implications for the workforce by providing training opportunities and potentially filling skill gaps.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to suboptimal pricing.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure can incentivize higher spending.
Long contract duration may not adapt well to changing needs.
Sole-source award limits transparency in pricing.
No indication of performance metrics or evaluation criteria.

Positive Signals

Award to a known entity (Transportation Communications Union/IAM) suggests established relationship.
Focus on apprenticeship training addresses critical workforce development needs.
Fixed fee component offers some level of cost predictability.
Contract duration implies a sustained commitment to training programs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader 'Labor and Workforce Development' sector, specifically focusing on apprenticeship programs. The market for such services involves educational institutions, labor unions, and specialized training providers. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more specific details on the training provided, but government investment in apprenticeship programs is a significant component of workforce development initiatives.

Small Business Impact

The contract details do not indicate any small business set-aside provisions. This means that the primary contractor, Transportation Communications Union/IAM, is not obligated to subcontract a specific portion of the work to small businesses. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific award is likely minimal, unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Labor's Office of Job Corps. Accountability measures would be defined by the terms of the cost-plus-fixed-fee agreement, including reporting requirements and adherence to the fixed fee. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award and the lack of publicly available detailed performance data.

Related Government Programs

Department of Labor Workforce Development Programs
Apprenticeship and Training Services
Labor Union Training Initiatives

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type
Lack of competitive bidding
Long contract duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Labor awarded $15.4 million to TRANSPORTATION COMMUNICATIONS UNION/IAM. AWARD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TRANSPORTATION COMMUNICATIONS UNION/IAM.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Labor (Office of Job Corps).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-08-01. End: 2011-09-21.

What is the track record of the Transportation Communications Union/IAM in delivering apprenticeship training services?

The provided data does not offer specific details on the track record of the Transportation Communications Union/IAM in delivering apprenticeship training. However, as a union, it is likely to have experience in representing workers and potentially in advocating for or facilitating training programs for its members. Further investigation would be required to assess their specific performance history, past contract successes, and any documented outcomes related to apprenticeship programs. This would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, any publicly available reports on their training initiatives, and potentially seeking information from the Department of Labor regarding their experience with this contractor.

How does the total award amount of $15.4 million compare to similar apprenticeship training contracts?

Comparing the $15.4 million award to similar apprenticeship training contracts is challenging without more specific data points. The size and scope of apprenticeship programs can vary significantly based on the number of participants, the duration of training, the trades or industries covered, and the geographic reach. A $15.4 million contract over approximately 7 years (2607 days) suggests a substantial program. To make a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify contracts with similar objectives, participant numbers, and training durations, ideally awarded through competitive processes to establish a benchmark for value. The sole-source nature of this award further complicates direct value comparisons.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for apprenticeship training?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for apprenticeship training include potential cost overruns and a lack of competitive pressure to ensure optimal value. Since the contract was not competed, there's no benchmark to ensure the fixed fee and cost reimbursement are reasonable. The cost-plus nature means the government bears the risk of increased costs incurred by the contractor, which could lead to the total award exceeding initial estimates if not managed carefully. The lack of competition also reduces the incentive for the contractor to be highly efficient or innovative, as there are no alternative providers to choose from. Furthermore, the long duration could mean the training remains static if not actively managed and updated.

What is the expected effectiveness of this apprenticeship program based on its structure and award?

The expected effectiveness of this apprenticeship program is difficult to ascertain solely from the award data. Its effectiveness will largely depend on the quality of the training curriculum, the qualifications of the instructors, the relevance of the skills taught to current labor market demands, and the contractor's ability to manage and deliver the program. The sole-source award and cost-plus-fixed-fee structure present potential challenges to maximizing effectiveness and value. While the long duration suggests a sustained effort, it does not guarantee success. Robust oversight, clear performance metrics, and regular program evaluations by the Department of Labor would be crucial to ensure the program meets its objectives and effectively develops skilled workers.

How has federal spending on apprenticeship training evolved, and where does this contract fit in?

Federal spending on apprenticeship training has generally seen fluctuations based on economic conditions and administration priorities, often increasing during periods focused on workforce development and skilled labor shortages. This $15.4 million contract, awarded in 2004 and ending in 2011, represents a specific investment in apprenticeship during that timeframe. To understand its place in the broader evolution of federal spending, one would need to analyze historical budget allocations for apprenticeship programs across different agencies and administrations. This contract's sole-source nature and specific award amount provide a data point for understanding how such programs were procured and funded during the mid-2000s, potentially highlighting trends in non-competitive awards for essential training services.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Technical and Trade Schools › Apprenticeship Training

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3 RESEARCH PL, ROCKVILLE, MD, 20850

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,392,464

Exercised Options: $15,392,464

Current Obligation: $15,392,464

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline