DoD's $18M Enterprise Architecture Labor Contract Awarded to Asynchrony Solutions in 2008

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,006,025 ($18.0M)

Contractor: Asynchrony Solutions, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-06-16

End Date: 2012-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,567 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS

Sector: IT

Official Description: LABOR FOR ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

Place of Performance

Location: SCOTT AFB, SAINT CLAIR County, ILLINOIS, 62225

State: Illinois Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $18.0 million to ASYNCHRONY SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: LABOR FOR ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE Key points: 1. Contract awarded for enterprise architecture labor services, indicating a need for specialized IT consulting. 2. The contract was competed under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' suggesting a unique procurement process. 3. A duration of over 4 years suggests a significant, long-term requirement for these services. 4. The contract was awarded as a delivery order, implying it was part of a larger indefinite-delivery contract vehicle. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to administrative management and general management consulting services. 6. The contract's value of approximately $18 million over its term warrants scrutiny for cost-effectiveness.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more specific details on the services rendered and the labor rates. The total award amount of $18 million over 1567 days (approximately 4.3 years) suggests an average annual spend of around $4.1 million. This figure needs to be compared against similar enterprise architecture support contracts within the Department of Defense or other large federal agencies to assess if it represents a fair price for the services provided. The 'labor hours' contract type can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This procurement method is unusual and suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources may have been excluded for particular reasons, or it might indicate a specific type of contract vehicle was used. Without further details on the exclusion criteria or the number of bidders that participated, it's difficult to fully assess the level of competition. This could potentially limit price discovery compared to a truly open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The 'limited' competition, as indicated by the procurement method, may have resulted in a less competitive pricing environment, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers than if a broader, unrestricted competition had been conducted.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically USTRANSCOM, which received enterprise architecture labor services. These services likely supported the development, maintenance, and improvement of the agency's enterprise architecture, crucial for IT modernization and strategic planning. The geographic impact is centered around USTRANSCOM's operational areas, primarily Illinois, where the contractor is located. The contract supported specialized IT consulting roles, potentially impacting the workforce within the federal IT consulting sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on management and IT consulting. The federal government is a significant consumer of such services to support its complex operations and modernization efforts. Enterprise architecture is a critical discipline for aligning IT investments with strategic business goals, ensuring interoperability, and managing technological complexity. Spending in this area is often driven by the need for strategic IT planning, system integration, and digital transformation initiatives across various agencies.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication from the provided data that this contract involved small business set-asides or significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The contract was awarded to Asynchrony Solutions, LLC, and the data does not specify its size or whether it is a small business itself. Further investigation would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation, if any, in fulfilling this contract's requirements.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the USTRANSCOM contracting office and relevant program managers within the Department of Defense. As it is a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle, the oversight mechanisms would be tied to the terms of that vehicle. Transparency regarding the specific services performed and the justification for labor hours billed would be key areas for accountability. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any issues of fraud, waste, or abuse were identified.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

it-consulting, enterprise-architecture, department-of-defense, ustranscom, administrative-management-and-general-management-consulting-services, labor-hours, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, delivery-order, illinois, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, it-modernization

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $18.0 million to ASYNCHRONY SOLUTIONS, LLC. LABOR FOR ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ASYNCHRONY SOLUTIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (USTRANSCOM).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-06-16. End: 2012-09-30.

What specific enterprise architecture services were provided under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'LABOR FOR ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE' under NAICS code 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services). While the specific tasks are not detailed, typical services under such a contract could include developing and maintaining the agency's enterprise architecture roadmap, defining architectural standards and principles, conducting technology assessments, supporting IT investment decisions, ensuring alignment between business and IT strategies, and facilitating system integration efforts. The 'labor hours' contract type suggests that the contractor provided personnel to perform these functions directly for USTRANSCOM.

How does the $18 million award compare to similar enterprise architecture contracts within the DoD?

Comparing the $18 million award for enterprise architecture labor over approximately 4.3 years requires context. This averages to about $4.1 million annually. To assess value, this figure should be benchmarked against other DoD contracts for similar EA support, considering factors like the scope of services, the seniority and specialization of the labor provided, and the specific agency's complexity. Without access to a broader dataset of comparable contracts, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a high, low, or average spend. However, for a specialized function like enterprise architecture, significant investment is often necessary for agencies undertaking major IT modernization or strategic planning.

What are the potential risks associated with a 'labor hours' contract for enterprise architecture services?

The primary risk with a 'labor hours' contract, especially for complex services like enterprise architecture, is the potential for cost overruns. Since payment is based on the hours worked by contractor personnel, there's an incentive for longer engagement times if not managed strictly. This necessitates robust oversight from the government to ensure that the hours billed are necessary, efficient, and directly contribute to the contract's objectives. Scope creep can also be a risk, where tasks expand beyond the original intent without a corresponding adjustment in the contract's ceiling or a re-competition. Effective project management and clear performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the procurement method 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' imply about this contract?

The procurement method 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' is somewhat contradictory and requires clarification. Typically, 'full and open competition' means all responsible sources are permitted to submit offers. 'Exclusion of sources' implies that certain potential bidders were deliberately prevented from participating. This could occur if the contract was a modification or task order under an existing indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract where only certain awardees of the base IDIQ were eligible, or if specific justifications (e.g., national security, unique capabilities) were made to exclude certain firms. It suggests a competitive process occurred, but not necessarily one that involved every possible interested vendor.

What is the track record of Asynchrony Solutions, LLC in performing federal IT consulting contracts?

Based solely on the provided data, we know Asynchrony Solutions, LLC was awarded this $18 million contract by the Department of Defense (USTRANSCOM) in 2008 for enterprise architecture labor. To assess their track record, a broader search of federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) would be necessary to identify all contracts awarded to this entity, their values, performance ratings, and the types of services rendered. This would provide a more comprehensive view of their experience, past performance, and reliability in delivering federal IT consulting services.

How has federal spending on enterprise architecture consulting evolved since this contract was awarded in 2008?

Federal spending on enterprise architecture (EA) consulting has likely evolved significantly since 2008. Post-2008, there was a strong push towards IT modernization, cloud adoption, and data-driven decision-making, all areas where EA plays a crucial role. Initiatives like the Federal Cloud Computing Strategy and the Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act have influenced how agencies approach IT investments and architecture. While specific aggregate spending figures for EA consulting are hard to isolate, the overall trend has been towards more agile, adaptable, and secure architectures, often leveraging commercial cloud services. This shift may have altered the nature of EA consulting, moving towards more strategic guidance on cloud migration, cybersecurity architecture, and data governance.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesAdministrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: HTC71107R0005

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: World Wide Technology Holding CO., Inc. (UEI: 131784451)

Address: 1701 WASHINGTON AVE, SAINT LOUIS, MO, 63103

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,603,836

Exercised Options: $18,006,025

Current Obligation: $18,006,025

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HTC71107D0016

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2008-06-16

Current End Date: 2012-09-30

Potential End Date: 2012-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2018-10-17

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending