Education technology impact evaluation contract awarded to Mathematica Inc. for over $14.3 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,373,796 ($14.4M)

Contractor: Mathematica Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Education

Start Date: 2004-03-10

End Date: 2009-03-24

Contract Duration: 1,840 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IMPACT EVALUATION OF EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY INTERVENTIONS

Place of Performance

Location: PRINCETON, MERCER County, NEW JERSEY, 08540

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Education obligated $14.4 million to MATHEMATICA INC. for work described as: IMPACT EVALUATION OF EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY INTERVENTIONS Key points: 1. Contract focused on assessing the effectiveness of educational technology interventions. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust market. 3. Duration of over 1800 days indicates a long-term, in-depth evaluation. 4. Contract type 'Cost Plus Award Fee' incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 5. Geographic focus on New Jersey for the study. 6. No specific small business set-aside noted, but subcontracting opportunities may exist.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of over $14.3 million for a multi-year evaluation of educational technology interventions appears substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale program evaluations would be necessary to definitively assess value for money. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure suggests that the government aims to incentivize high performance, but it also carries a risk of cost overruns if not managed diligently. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data, a precise value assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION', indicating that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. This suggests a competitive environment where price and technical merit were likely key factors. The presence of two bids (as indicated by 'no': 2) is on the lower side for full and open competition, which could warrant further investigation into market dynamics or barriers to entry for other potential bidders.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs and encouraging innovation. However, with only two bidders, the potential for significant cost savings might have been limited compared to a scenario with more robust competition.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely students and educators in New Jersey, who will experience the outcomes of evaluated educational technology interventions. The contract delivers critical insights into the effectiveness of educational technologies, informing future investment and policy decisions. Geographic impact is concentrated in New Jersey, where the evaluations are conducted. Workforce implications may include researchers, data analysts, and educational specialists involved in the evaluation process.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' contract type if performance incentives are not tightly managed.
Limited number of bidders (2) in a 'full and open competition' could indicate potential market concentration or barriers to entry.

Positive Signals

Awarded through 'full and open competition', suggesting a fair and accessible bidding process.
The long contract duration (1840 days) implies a commitment to thorough and comprehensive evaluation.
The focus on evaluating educational technology interventions addresses a critical area for modernizing education.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader 'Education Services' sector, specifically focusing on the evaluation of technology's role in learning. The market for educational technology and its assessment is growing, driven by the increasing integration of digital tools in classrooms. Comparable spending might include other large-scale program evaluations or research grants within the federal education portfolio. The size of this contract suggests a significant investment in understanding the efficacy of these tools.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside for this contract. Mathematica Inc. is a large research firm, suggesting that if subcontracting occurred, it would be to support specific aspects of the evaluation. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the extent to which small businesses were engaged as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Education's contracting officers and program managers. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure necessitates careful monitoring of performance against defined award criteria to ensure value for money and prevent unnecessary costs. Transparency would be enhanced through the publication of evaluation findings, though the internal oversight processes are not detailed.

Related Government Programs

Federal Education Research Grants
Educational Technology Programs
Program Evaluation Services
Department of Education Research Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost creep due to CPAF structure
Limited number of bidders in a full and open competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Education awarded $14.4 million to MATHEMATICA INC.. IMPACT EVALUATION OF EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY INTERVENTIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MATHEMATICA INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Education (Department of Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-03-10. End: 2009-03-24.

What specific educational technology interventions were evaluated under this contract?

The contract, titled 'IMPACT EVALUATION OF EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY INTERVENTIONS', broadly covers the assessment of various educational technologies. However, the specific interventions evaluated are not detailed in the provided summary data. Typically, such evaluations would focus on a range of digital tools, software, or platforms designed to enhance teaching and learning, such as learning management systems, adaptive learning software, digital content, or communication platforms. A deeper dive into the contract's statement of work or subsequent reports would be required to identify the precise technologies examined.

How does the $14.3 million contract value compare to other large-scale education program evaluations?

The $14.3 million contract value is substantial for a single evaluation project. To benchmark this, one would need to compare it against the average cost of large-scale, multi-year program evaluations conducted by the Department of Education or other federal agencies. Factors influencing cost include the scope of the evaluation, the number of sites or participants, the complexity of the methodologies employed (e.g., randomized controlled trials), and the duration of the study. Without specific comparable data points, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents high or low value, but it signifies a significant investment in evidence generation for educational technology.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract for this type of evaluation?

The primary risks with a CPAF contract for an evaluation like this involve potential cost escalation and the subjective nature of award fees. While CPAF incentivizes performance, the contractor may be motivated to incur costs to achieve higher award fees, potentially leading to expenditures beyond what might be necessary in a fixed-price contract. Furthermore, defining and objectively measuring the 'award' criteria can be challenging, leading to potential disputes or perceptions of bias in fee determination. Robust government oversight is crucial to ensure that costs are reasonable and that award fees are tied to clearly defined, measurable performance objectives.

What was the track record of Mathematica Inc. in conducting similar federal evaluations prior to this award?

Mathematica Inc. is a well-established research firm with extensive experience in conducting large-scale evaluations for federal agencies, including the Department of Education. They have a history of managing complex research projects, often involving rigorous methodologies like randomized controlled trials. Their track record generally includes work on education policy, health, and social welfare programs. Prior to this specific award, Mathematica would have likely demonstrated its capacity through previous successful contracts, publications, and a strong reputation for research integrity and analytical rigor within the federal contracting space.

What are the implications of the limited competition (2 bidders) for this contract?

The fact that only two bids were received for this 'full and open competition' contract, despite its substantial value and duration, raises questions about the competitive landscape. It could suggest that the market for such specialized evaluations is limited, or that potential bidders faced barriers to entry (e.g., specific expertise requirements, pre-qualification processes). For taxpayers, limited competition can sometimes mean less downward pressure on pricing and potentially fewer innovative solutions compared to a more crowded field. However, if both bidders were highly qualified, the government could still secure a strong outcome. Further analysis might explore why more firms did not participate.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Mathematica Inc (UEI: 154125140)

Address: 600 ALEXANDER PARK, PRINCETON, NJ, 12

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,373,796

Exercised Options: $14,373,796

Current Obligation: $14,373,796

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: ED01CO0039

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline