Leidos Inc. contract for database production services awarded by DoD at $31.9M, exceeding base rate by 3x

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,914,666 ($31.9M)

Contractor: Leidos, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-11-19

End Date: 2016-06-10

Contract Duration: 569 days

Daily Burn Rate: $56.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF DB PRODUCTION - POPULATION OF THE MDB - 3X BASE RATE

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, ORANGE County, FLORIDA, 32826

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.9 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF DB PRODUCTION - POPULATION OF THE MDB - 3X BASE RATE Key points: 1. Contract value significantly exceeds the base rate, indicating potential cost overruns or scope expansion. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a robust market for these services. 3. The contract's duration and cost structure warrant scrutiny for efficiency and value. 4. Performance context is limited, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the services delivered. 5. Computer Systems Design Services sector is competitive, but this contract's pricing needs benchmarking. 6. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's total award of $31.9 million for database production services, which is three times the base rate, raises concerns about cost efficiency. Without detailed performance metrics or a breakdown of the services rendered, it's challenging to benchmark the value against similar contracts. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure, while common, can lead to cost escalations if not managed tightly. Further analysis is needed to understand the drivers behind the significant deviation from the base rate.

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 presence of two bids suggests a degree of competition, but the specific details of the bidding process and the nature of the competition are not fully detailed. A higher number of bidders typically leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it promotes a competitive environment that can drive down prices. However, the final price paid in this instance was significantly higher than the base rate, suggesting that the competitive process may not have fully translated into cost savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely Department of Defense personnel who rely on the accurate and timely population of the MDB for operational and strategic decision-making. The services delivered involve the production and population of a Master Database (MDB), crucial for data management and analysis within the DoD. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting DoD operations. Workforce implications may include specialized IT and database management roles, potentially supporting a skilled labor force.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Computer Systems Design Services sector, a broad category encompassing IT consulting, system integration, and database management. This sector is characterized by rapid technological advancements and a dynamic competitive landscape. The market size for IT services to the U.S. federal government is substantial, with agencies like the Department of Defense being major clients. This contract represents a specific need for database population and management, a critical function for any large organization relying on data.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any small business set-aside provisions for this contract. As a large contract awarded to Leidos, Inc., it is unlikely to have directly benefited small businesses through set-asides. However, there may be subcontracting opportunities for small businesses, which are not detailed in the provided information. The absence of specific small business participation goals warrants further investigation into subcontracting plans.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of the Army's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure necessitates close monitoring of costs and performance to ensure value for money. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected. Transparency regarding the specific deliverables and performance against the base rate is crucial for effective oversight.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

it, defense, department-of-the-army, delivery-order, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, computer-systems-design-services, database-management, leidos-inc, florida

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.9 million to LEIDOS, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF DB PRODUCTION - POPULATION OF THE MDB - 3X BASE RATE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $31.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-11-19. End: 2016-06-10.

What specific factors contributed to the contract's cost exceeding the base rate by three times?

The significant cost overrun, with the final award of $31.9 million being three times the base rate, suggests several potential factors. These could include unforeseen technical complexities in populating the Master Database (MDB), an expansion of the contract's scope beyond the initial requirements, or an underestimation of the effort required during the initial bidding phase. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while offering flexibility, can also allow for cost increases if not managed with stringent oversight. Without a detailed breakdown of the work performed and the justification for cost adjustments, it is difficult to pinpoint the exact reasons. Further investigation into contract modifications, performance reports, and the contractor's cost submissions would be necessary to fully understand the cost escalation.

How does the performance of Leidos, Inc. on this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar database production services?

Assessing Leidos, Inc.'s performance against industry benchmarks is challenging with the limited data provided. Key performance indicators (KPIs) such as data accuracy rates, population speed, system uptime, and user satisfaction are not publicly available. The contract's value and duration suggest a significant undertaking, but without specific metrics, it's impossible to determine if the services delivered met or exceeded industry standards. A comparison would require access to performance reports, quality assurance reviews, and potentially data from other government agencies or commercial entities that have procured similar database population services. The fact that it was a full and open competition might imply that Leidos's bid was competitive, but this does not directly translate to performance quality.

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

The primary risks associated with this contract include cost overruns, potential schedule delays, and performance deficiencies. The significant deviation from the base rate already highlights a cost risk. Performance risk exists if the database population is inaccurate, incomplete, or delivered late, impacting downstream DoD operations. Schedule risk is also present, as delays in database population can have cascading effects. Mitigation strategies would typically involve robust contract oversight by the Department of the Army, including regular performance reviews, audits of contractor costs, and clear communication channels to address issues proactively. The CPFF structure necessitates close monitoring of expenditures against progress. The existence of two bidders in the competition might suggest a degree of market confidence, but does not eliminate inherent project risks.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar database production services within the Department of Defense?

Historical spending on similar database production services within the Department of Defense (DoD) is likely substantial, given the agency's vast data management needs. The DoD procures a wide array of IT services, including database design, development, population, and maintenance. Contracts for such services can range from small, specialized tasks to large, enterprise-wide solutions. Factors influencing spending include the complexity of the databases, the volume of data, security requirements, and the specific technologies employed. While this specific contract's value of $31.9 million is significant, it needs to be viewed within the broader context of the DoD's overall IT budget, which runs into billions of dollars annually. Benchmarking this contract against other similar DoD database contracts would require a detailed analysis of contract databases, focusing on scope, duration, and pricing models.

What is the strategic importance of the Master Database (MDB) being populated under this contract for the Department of Defense?

The Master Database (MDB) is likely of critical strategic importance to the Department of Defense, serving as a central repository for vital information. Such databases are often foundational for intelligence gathering, operational planning, logistics, personnel management, and strategic decision-making. The accurate and timely population of an MDB ensures that DoD leadership has access to reliable data for situational awareness and policy formulation. In a military context, data integrity and accessibility can directly impact mission success and national security. Therefore, contracts focused on populating and maintaining these critical data assets are essential components of the DoD's information infrastructure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesComputer Systems Design and Related ServicesComputer Systems Design Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTDEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W900KK11R0002

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 611641312)

Address: 11951 FREEDOM DR, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,240,579

Exercised Options: $32,068,319

Current Obligation: $31,914,666

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 96

Total Subaward Amount: $22,400,231

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W900KK11D0006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2014-11-19

Current End Date: 2016-06-10

Potential End Date: 2016-06-10 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2016-10-26

More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.

View all Leidos, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending