HHS awarded $9.4M for worldwide work-life program services to Lifecare, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,407,299 ($9.4M)

Contractor: Lifecare, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2017-03-01

End Date: 2018-08-31

Contract Duration: 548 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF THE PURPOSE OF THIS TASK ORDER IS TO PROVIDE THE FOH DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED WORKLIFE PROGRAM TO FEDERAL ORGANIZATIONS LOCATED WORLDWIDE.

Place of Performance

Location: SHELTON, FAIRFIELD County, CONNECTICUT, 06484

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $9.4 million to LIFECARE, INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF THE PURPOSE OF THIS TASK ORDER IS TO PROVIDE THE FOH DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED WORKLIFE PROGRAM TO FEDERAL ORGANIZATIONS LOCATED WORLDWIDE. Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract's fixed-price nature aims to control costs and provide predictable spending. 3. Performance period of 548 days indicates a medium-term service delivery requirement. 4. The service category (Legal Services) appears to be a unique application for a work-life program. 5. The contract was awarded as a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $9.4 million for a 548-day period for a worldwide work-life program is difficult to benchmark without more specific service details. The fixed-price contract type suggests an attempt to control costs. However, the lack of detailed performance metrics or comparison to similar programs makes a definitive value assessment challenging. The per-unit cost is not readily calculable from the provided data.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The fact that it was a delivery order suggests it was placed against an existing contract vehicle that itself was competed. The number of bidders is not specified, but full and open competition generally promotes price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from the potential for competitive pricing inherent in a full and open competition, which can drive down costs compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Public Impact

Federal employees worldwide are the primary beneficiaries of the work-life program services. The program aims to enhance employee well-being and support work-life balance. Geographic impact is global, serving federal organizations across different locations. Workforce implications include potential improvements in employee morale, retention, and productivity.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The specific nature of 'work-life program' services within the 'Offices of Lawyers' NAICS code is unclear and warrants further investigation.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the program's effectiveness and value for money.
The contract duration and value, while not excessively large, require monitoring for potential scope creep or cost overruns.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type helps to control costs and provides budget certainty.
The contract aims to provide valuable support services to federal employees globally.

Sector Analysis

The Information Technology sector is broad, but this contract falls under professional services, specifically legal services (NAICS 541110), which is an unusual classification for a 'work-life program'. This suggests the program might involve legal aspects of work-life balance or employee support. The market for employee support and work-life programs is diverse, often involving HR consulting and benefits administration. Benchmarking this specific contract is difficult due to the unique combination of service type and industry classification.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. There is no explicit mention of small business set-asides. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation and its impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration, which awarded the contract. Accountability measures would be defined by the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, but detailed program performance data may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Employee Benefits Programs
Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs)
Human Resources Consulting Services
Workforce Development Programs

Risk Flags

Unclear service scope alignment with NAICS code.
Lack of detailed performance metrics.
Limited public information on program outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $9.4 million to LIFECARE, INC. IGF::OT::IGF THE PURPOSE OF THIS TASK ORDER IS TO PROVIDE THE FOH DESIGNED AND DEVELOPED WORKLIFE PROGRAM TO FEDERAL ORGANIZATIONS LOCATED WORLDWIDE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LIFECARE, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $9.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-03-01. End: 2018-08-31.

What specific services constitute the 'work-life program' provided under this contract, and how do they align with the NAICS code for 'Offices of Lawyers'?

The provided data does not detail the specific services offered within the 'work-life program'. The classification under NAICS code 541110 ('Offices of Lawyers') is unusual for such a program. It is possible that the services include legal consultations related to work-life balance, family law, or other employee-related legal matters. Alternatively, the classification might be an administrative categorization that doesn't perfectly reflect the service delivery. Without further documentation, the exact nature of the services and their alignment with the legal services code remains unclear. This ambiguity could impact the assessment of program relevance and effectiveness.

How does the $9.4 million award for a 548-day period compare to similar work-life or employee support programs in the federal government?

Benchmarking this contract against similar federal work-life or employee support programs is challenging due to the limited information provided and the unique classification. Typical employee assistance programs (EAPs) or wellness initiatives often have different cost structures and service scopes. A direct comparison of the $9.4 million award over approximately 1.5 years would require identifying contracts with comparable service offerings, geographic scope (worldwide), and target populations. The specific inclusion of legal services under the 'work-life' umbrella further complicates direct comparisons. Without access to detailed service descriptions and performance metrics of comparable contracts, assessing whether this award represents good or fair value is difficult.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for Lifecare, Inc. under this contract, and how were they measured?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) established for Lifecare, Inc. under this contract. Typically, contracts of this nature would include metrics related to service accessibility, user satisfaction, program utilization rates, and potentially impact on employee retention or morale. The assessment of performance would rely on reporting mechanisms outlined in the contract, such as regular progress reports, client feedback surveys, or utilization statistics. The absence of this information in the award data prevents a thorough evaluation of the contractor's performance and the program's effectiveness.

What is the historical spending pattern for work-life programs within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)?

The provided data focuses on a single contract award and does not offer insights into historical spending patterns for work-life programs within HHS. To analyze historical spending, one would need to examine contract databases for similar services awarded by HHS over multiple fiscal years. This would involve identifying relevant contract vehicles, service descriptions, and award amounts. Understanding past investments in work-life initiatives would provide context for the current $9.4 million award, helping to determine if it represents an increase, decrease, or consistent level of spending in this area. Without this broader historical data, it's impossible to assess trends.

Were there any specific risk factors identified during the procurement process for this contract, and how were they mitigated?

The provided award data does not contain information regarding specific risk factors identified during the procurement process for this contract, nor does it detail any mitigation strategies employed. Risk assessments are typically part of the source selection process and may cover areas such as contractor performance history, technical approach feasibility, management capability, and financial stability. For a contract of this nature, potential risks could include challenges in delivering services globally, ensuring consistent quality, or achieving desired employee engagement. Mitigation might involve stringent performance requirements, clear communication protocols, and robust oversight. Further review of the solicitation documents and source selection decision would be necessary to identify and evaluate these risks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Legal Services › Offices of Lawyers

Product/Service Code: MEDICAL SERVICES › GENERAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2 ARMSTRONG RD, SHELTON, CT, 06484

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $9,407,299

Exercised Options: $9,407,299

Current Obligation: $9,407,299

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS15F0058M

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline