Department of Education awards $108.8M contract to Educational Testing Service for NAEP assessment instruments and data analysis

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $108,841,401 ($108.8M)

Contractor: Educational Testing Service

Awarding Agency: Department of Education

Start Date: 2013-03-07

End Date: 2019-05-31

Contract Duration: 2,276 days

Daily Burn Rate: $47.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: "CRITICAL FUNCTIONS" IGF::CT::IGF DESIGN NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (NAEP) ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS AND SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS THAT MEET THE HIGHEST INDUSTRY AND NCES STANDARDS FOR PROVIDING VALID AND USEFUL NATIONAL, REGIONAL, STATE, AND SCHOOL DISTRICT RESULTS AS WELL AS FOR SIGNIFICANT SUBGROUPS; ANALYZE DATA TO PRODUCE STATISTICS IN ALL ASSESSED AREAS AND TARGETED SPECIAL REPORTS USING STATISTICALLY AND PSYCHOMETRICALLY RIGOROUS METHODOLOGIES THAT HELP IN DETECTING QUALITY CONTROL PROBLEMS, ASSIST IN THE UNDERSTANDING OF RESULTS AND MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO FOCUS ON RELEVANT AND TIMELY EDUCATIONAL ISSUES; REPORT TIMELY ASSESSMENTS RESULTS (I.E., WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE END OF DATA COLLECTION FOR READING AND MATHEMATICS AT FOURTH AND EIGHTH GRADES AND WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS FOR ALL OTHER ASSESSMENTS) IN A WAY THAT COMMUNICATES EFFECTIVELY WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING THOSE MORE TECHNICALLY SOPHISTICATED; PROVIDE RESULTS IN PRINTED AND WEB-BASED FORMATS.

Place of Performance

Location: PRINCETON, MERCER County, NEW JERSEY, 08540

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Education obligated $108.8 million to EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE for work described as: "CRITICAL FUNCTIONS" IGF::CT::IGF DESIGN NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (NAEP) ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS AND SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS THAT MEET THE HIGHEST INDUSTRY AND NCES STANDARDS FOR PROVIDING VALID AND USEFUL NATIONAL, REGIONAL, STATE, AND SCHOOL DISTRICT RESU… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on developing and maintaining high-standard assessment instruments for national educational progress. 2. Analysis of data aims to identify quality control issues and inform educational policy. 3. The contract duration of over 6 years suggests a long-term need for these services. 4. Educational Testing Service is a well-established entity in educational assessment. 5. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes performance but can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 6. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating a broad search for qualified bidders.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $108.8 million over approximately 6 years for national educational assessment services appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale educational assessment contracts is difficult without more specific service details. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee structure suggests a focus on achieving specific performance targets, which can be a good value driver if managed effectively. The contract's emphasis on rigorous methodologies and adherence to NCES standards indicates a commitment to quality.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open competition process generally fosters a competitive environment that can lead to better pricing and innovation. This approach is designed to ensure the government secures the best possible services at a fair price by leveraging the market.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and high-quality services by allowing all qualified vendors to participate.

Public Impact

Students and educators nationwide benefit from valid and useful national, regional, state, and school district results. Policymakers and researchers gain insights into educational trends and areas needing improvement. The contract supports the delivery of timely assessments in core subjects like reading and mathematics. Workforce implications include employment for researchers, psychometricians, data analysts, and administrative staff at the contractor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Award Fee contracts can sometimes lead to higher final costs if performance incentives are aggressively pursued without strict cost controls.
The long duration of the contract (over 6 years) may present risks if educational needs or technological landscapes shift significantly during its term.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
Contractor's established expertise in educational testing provides a strong foundation for successful performance.
Emphasis on rigorous methodologies and adherence to NCES standards indicates a commitment to data integrity and quality.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities sector, specifically focusing on educational measurement and assessment. The market for large-scale educational testing and data analysis is dominated by a few specialized organizations. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a flagship program, and contracts supporting it are significant within this niche. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely involve other large federal contracts for national surveys or standardized testing initiatives.

Small Business Impact

There is no explicit mention of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements in the provided data. Given the specialized nature of developing and analyzing national educational assessments, it is possible that the prime contractor, Educational Testing Service, relies on its own internal expertise or a limited pool of specialized subcontractors. Further investigation would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Education's relevant program offices and contracting officers. The contract's emphasis on meeting NCES standards implies a level of quality control. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to potential fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency is facilitated by the public reporting of NAEP results, though the internal workings of the contract may not be fully public.

Related Government Programs

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Programs
Federal Education Data Collection and Analysis

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may pose risks if educational needs or technology evolve rapidly.
Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires careful monitoring to manage potential cost overruns.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Education awarded $108.8 million to EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE. "CRITICAL FUNCTIONS" IGF::CT::IGF DESIGN NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (NAEP) ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS AND SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS THAT MEET THE HIGHEST INDUSTRY AND NCES STANDARDS FOR PROVIDING VALID AND USEFUL NATIONAL, REGIONAL, STATE, AND SCHOOL DISTRICT RESULTS AS WELL AS FOR SIGNIFICANT SUBGROUPS; ANALYZE DATA TO PRODUCE STATISTICS IN ALL ASSESSED AREAS AND TARGETED SPECIAL REPORTS USING STATISTICALLY AND PSYCHOMETRICALLY RIGOROUS METHODOLOGIES THAT HELP IN DETECTING QUALI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $108.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-03-07. End: 2019-05-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for NAEP assessment instruments and data analysis by the Department of Education?

Historical spending on NAEP assessment instruments and data analysis by the Department of Education, particularly through its National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), has been substantial and ongoing. Educational Testing Service (ETS) has been a long-term, if not primary, contractor for these services for many years, reflecting their deep expertise and established infrastructure. While the specific award amount of $108.8 million for this definitive contract (2013-2019) is a significant figure, it represents a portion of the overall federal investment in NAEP. Previous and subsequent contracts for similar services would likely show a consistent, multi-million dollar annual expenditure to maintain the integrity and scope of the NAEP program, which is critical for tracking educational progress across the nation.

How does the performance of Educational Testing Service (ETS) on this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar services?

Educational Testing Service (ETS) is a highly reputable and established organization in the field of educational assessment, often considered a benchmark itself for large-scale testing. On this specific contract, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure indicates that ETS's performance was evaluated against specific criteria, with potential for award fees based on meeting or exceeding those standards. While raw performance metrics are not detailed here, ETS's continued role in supporting the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) suggests a history of satisfactory or better performance. Benchmarking would typically involve comparing their adherence to timelines, quality of deliverables (assessment instruments, data analysis reports), and cost-effectiveness relative to other potential large-scale assessment providers, though few possess the same scale and history as ETS.

What are the key risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?

Key risks associated with this contract include potential cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contracts, especially given the long duration (over 6 years). Another risk is the potential for outdated assessment methodologies or instruments if not continuously updated to reflect current educational research and psychometric standards. Furthermore, reliance on a single primary contractor like ETS, even with open competition, could pose a risk if their capacity or focus shifts. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust oversight from the Department of Education, clear performance metrics tied to award fees, regular reviews of deliverables, and potentially incorporating mechanisms for incorporating updated research and technology throughout the contract period. The competitive award process also serves as a baseline mitigation against selecting a suboptimal vendor.

What is the overall effectiveness of the NAEP program in achieving its stated goals, and how does this contract contribute?

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) program is widely regarded as a crucial tool for monitoring the condition and progress of American education across various subjects and student demographics. Its effectiveness lies in providing objective, comparable data that informs policy decisions, identifies achievement gaps, and highlights areas needing intervention. This contract directly contributes to the program's effectiveness by ensuring the development and maintenance of high-quality, psychometrically sound assessment instruments and rigorous data analysis. By providing valid and useful results, the contract enables policymakers, educators, and the public to understand educational trends and make informed decisions aimed at improving student outcomes nationwide.

How has the competition level for NAEP-related contracts evolved over time, and what does this imply for value for money?

The competition level for NAEP-related contracts, particularly for the core assessment instruments and data analysis, has historically seen a limited number of highly specialized organizations capable of undertaking such large-scale, complex work. Educational Testing Service (ETS) has been a dominant player for many years. While the contract data indicates 'full and open competition,' the practical reality often means that only a few entities possess the requisite expertise, infrastructure, and track record. This limited pool of highly qualified bidders can sometimes temper the price competition compared to markets with numerous potential suppliers. However, for a program as critical and specialized as NAEP, ensuring the highest quality and reliability through experienced contractors like ETS is paramount, and the 'award fee' component aims to drive performance within that context, potentially yielding good value despite less intense price pressure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: ED-IES-12-R-0021

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 666 ROSEDALE RD STOP 85 D, PRINCETON, NJ, 08541

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $108,881,663

Exercised Options: $108,881,663

Current Obligation: $108,841,401

Actual Outlays: $725,003

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 38

Total Subaward Amount: $14,798,255

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline