DHS FEMA awards $600K for underground structure flood risk study, citing specific legislative mandate

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $600,504 ($600.5K)

Contractor: National Academy of Sciences

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2013-09-01

End Date: 2015-12-31

Contract Duration: 851 days

Daily Burn Rate: $706/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF STUDY OF RATING VALUE FOR STRUCTURES THAT HAVE NEGATIVE ELEVATION, I.E., ARE UNDERGROUND. THIS STUDY IS NECESSITATED BY THE BIGGERT-WATERS NFIP REFORM ACT OF 2012

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20418

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $600,503.97 to NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF STUDY OF RATING VALUE FOR STRUCTURES THAT HAVE NEGATIVE ELEVATION, I.E., ARE UNDERGROUND. THIS STUDY IS NECESSITATED BY THE BIGGERT-WATERS NFIP REFORM ACT OF 2012 Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a specialized scientific study, though direct benchmarks are limited. 2. Sole-source award suggests a lack of market competition for this niche expertise. 3. Study's focus on negative elevation structures presents unique risk assessment challenges. 4. Performance period of over two years indicates a substantial research undertaking. 5. Contract aligns with legislative directives to improve flood insurance program accuracy. 6. Consultant's expertise in scientific and technical services is a key factor in award.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $600,504 for a specialized study on flood risk for underground structures is difficult to benchmark directly due to its niche nature. Without comparable studies or detailed cost breakdowns, assessing value for money is challenging. The 'Cost No Fee' contract type suggests that the contractor will be reimbursed for allowable costs up to a ceiling, with no additional profit. This can sometimes lead to less incentive for cost control compared to fixed-price contracts.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one contractor was solicited. The justification for this approach is likely tied to the specialized nature of the research required, potentially involving unique expertise or access to proprietary data held by the National Academy of Sciences. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for price discovery through a bidding process, and the government could not leverage market forces to potentially secure a lower price.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition for this specialized study means taxpayers did not benefit from potential cost savings that might have arisen from a competitive bidding process. The price was determined through negotiation with a single provider.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which will receive data to improve risk assessments. The study will deliver insights into the flood risk associated with underground structures, a previously underserved area in flood modeling. The geographic impact is national, as findings will inform flood insurance policies and risk mapping across the United States. There are no direct workforce implications, as this is a research and consulting contract.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing.
Cost-plus contract type may reduce contractor incentive for cost efficiency.
Niche subject matter makes independent cost benchmarking difficult.

Positive Signals

Addresses a specific legislative mandate (Biggert-Waters NFIP Reform Act of 2012).
National Academy of Sciences is a reputable institution for scientific research.
Focuses on an understudied area of flood risk.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Scientific and Technical Consulting Services sector, specifically focusing on environmental consulting and risk assessment. The market for highly specialized scientific studies like this is often limited, with a few key institutions or firms possessing the necessary expertise. The total federal spending on 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' (NAICS 541690) can be substantial, but contracts for such niche research are a small fraction of that total.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve any small business set-asides or subcontracting opportunities. The award was made to the National Academy of Sciences, a non-profit organization, on a sole-source basis, indicating no specific focus on engaging small businesses in this particular procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) contracting officers and program managers. As a 'Cost No Fee' contract, financial oversight would focus on ensuring that reported costs are allowable, allocable, and reasonable according to federal acquisition regulations. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of the study's findings, which are intended to inform public policy.

Related Government Programs

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Biggert-Waters NFIP Reform Act of 2012
FEMA Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP)

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits transparency and potential cost savings.
Cost-reimbursement contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $600,503.97 to NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. IGF::OT::IGF STUDY OF RATING VALUE FOR STRUCTURES THAT HAVE NEGATIVE ELEVATION, I.E., ARE UNDERGROUND. THIS STUDY IS NECESSITATED BY THE BIGGERT-WATERS NFIP REFORM ACT OF 2012

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $600,503.97.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-09-01. End: 2015-12-31.

What is the specific expertise of the National Academy of Sciences that justified a sole-source award for this flood risk study?

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is a private, non-profit institution chartered by the U.S. Congress to provide independent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology. Its reputation for rigorous, unbiased research and its convening power to bring together leading experts in various fields make it uniquely qualified for complex, policy-relevant studies. For this specific contract, the NAS likely possesses a deep bench of experts in hydrology, structural engineering, risk assessment, and insurance mathematics, coupled with established methodologies for conducting comprehensive scientific reviews and producing authoritative reports. The Biggert-Waters NFIP Reform Act of 2012 mandated this type of study, and the NAS's stature suggests it was the only entity considered capable of fulfilling the mandate to the required standard without extensive government effort to replicate its capabilities.

How does the 'Cost No Fee' contract type impact contractor incentives and government oversight compared to other contract types?

A 'Cost No Fee' (CNF) contract is a type of cost-reimbursement contract where the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable, allocable, and reasonable costs incurred in performing the contract, but receives no fee or profit. This contract type is typically used when the level of risk or uncertainty is high, or when the work is of such a nature that it is difficult to estimate costs in advance. For the contractor, the primary incentive is to recover incurred costs, as there is no additional profit motive. This can sometimes lead to less emphasis on cost control compared to fixed-price contracts. For the government, oversight is critical. Contracting officers and auditors must meticulously review the contractor's cost submissions to ensure compliance with the contract terms and federal cost principles. While it removes the profit motive, the government must ensure the work is performed efficiently and effectively within the estimated cost ceiling.

What are the potential risks associated with studying flood risk for underground structures compared to above-ground structures?

Studying flood risk for underground structures presents unique challenges and risks compared to above-ground structures. Firstly, access for inspection and data collection can be more difficult and costly. Secondly, the behavior of water in confined underground spaces is complex; hydrostatic pressure, buoyancy, and the potential for structural collapse under saturated conditions are significant concerns that require specialized engineering analysis. Thirdly, the lack of direct visual exposure to floodwaters means that damage assessment and monitoring are more reliant on indirect indicators and sensor data. Fourthly, the interaction with existing utility infrastructure (sewage, power, communications) in underground environments adds layers of complexity to risk assessment. Finally, the long-term effects of repeated saturation and drying cycles on materials and structural integrity may be less understood than for above-ground elements.

How does this study contribute to the goals of the Biggert-Waters NFIP Reform Act of 2012?

The Biggert-Waters NFIP Reform Act of 2012 aimed to make the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) more financially sound and sustainable by implementing various reforms. One key aspect was improving the accuracy of flood insurance rates and flood maps. This study directly addresses that goal by focusing on a critical gap in current flood risk assessment: underground structures. By providing a better understanding of the flood risks associated with basements, parking garages, tunnels, and other subterranean elements, the study's findings can lead to more accurate flood zone designations and more appropriate insurance premium calculations. This, in turn, helps to ensure that the NFIP is pricing risk more effectively, moving towards actuarial soundness as mandated by the Act.

What are the limitations of using NAICS code 541690 ('Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services') to understand federal spending in this area?

The NAICS code 541690, 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services,' is a broad category that encompasses a wide array of specialized consulting services not classified elsewhere. While this contract falls under it, the code's generality means it includes everything from environmental consulting and engineering analysis to management consulting for scientific endeavors. Therefore, using this code alone provides limited insight into specific spending patterns for flood risk assessment or similar niche scientific research. Federal agencies often use more granular internal classifications or specific contract descriptions to track spending on particular types of services. To truly understand spending in this area, one would need to analyze contracts within 541690 that specifically mention hydrology, risk assessment, structural engineering, or flood modeling, and potentially look at related NAICS codes in engineering or environmental services.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2101 CONSTITUTION AVE NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20418

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: $600,504

Exercised Options: $600,504

Current Obligation: $600,504

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSHQDC11D00009

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline