DoD's $24.4M ACE-IT Telecommunications contract awarded to Lockheed Martin without competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $24,401,583 ($24.4M)
Contractor: Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-10-09
End Date: 2010-09-30
Contract Duration: 356 days
Daily Burn Rate: $68.5K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: R0I0040 ACE-IT TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Place of Performance
Location: VICKSBURG, WARREN County, MISSISSIPPI, 39180
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $24.4 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN INTEGRATED SYSTEMS, LLC for work described as: R0I0040 ACE-IT TELECOMMUNICATIONS Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a cost-plus basis, potentially leading to higher final costs. 2. Sole-source award limits opportunities for competitive pricing and innovation. 3. Lack of competition raises concerns about value for money and potential overspending. 4. Contract duration of 356 days suggests a short-term or transitional need. 5. Awarded under the 'Computer Facilities Management Services' NAICS code. 6. Geographic focus on Mississippi for service delivery.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The contract's cost-plus award fee structure, combined with a sole-source award, makes a direct value-for-money assessment difficult without further data on the contractor's performance and actual costs incurred. Benchmarking against similar telecommunications management contracts is challenging due to the lack of competitive bidding. The awarded amount of $24.4 million for a one-year period suggests a significant investment, but the absence of competition prevents a clear determination of whether this represents a fair market price.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC, was considered. There is no indication of a competitive process, such as a request for proposals or a solicitation that allowed multiple bidders to submit offers. This approach bypasses the standard procurement procedures designed to foster competition and ensure the government receives the best possible pricing and services.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit the government's ability to leverage market competition to drive down costs, potentially resulting in higher expenditures for taxpayers compared to a competitively bid contract.
Public Impact
The Department of the Army benefits from telecommunications infrastructure management services. Services are delivered within Mississippi, impacting the local economy and workforce. The contract supports the operational readiness and communication capabilities of military units. Potential for specialized IT and telecommunications jobs in the Mississippi region.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition may lead to inflated costs.
- Cost-plus contract type can incentivize higher spending.
- Limited transparency due to sole-source award.
Positive Signals
- Award to a large, established defense contractor like Lockheed Martin suggests potential for reliable service delivery.
- Contract addresses critical telecommunications needs for the Department of the Army.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on computer facilities management and telecommunications. The market for such services is substantial, with numerous large and small businesses offering solutions. However, government procurement in this area often involves complex requirements and long-term relationships. Benchmarking this specific award is difficult without knowing the exact scope of services, but it represents a significant investment in maintaining essential communication infrastructure for a major military branch.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses indicated in the provided data. The award to a large prime contractor like Lockheed Martin suggests that the primary focus was on capability and existing relationships rather than small business participation. This could limit opportunities for small businesses to engage in this specific telecommunications project.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of the Army's contracting officers and potentially the Inspector General's office, especially given the sole-source nature and cost-plus fee structure. Transparency is limited due to the lack of a competitive bidding process. Accountability would be managed through contract performance reviews and audits, focusing on cost control and service delivery as defined in the contract terms.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) contracts
- Army IT support services
- Telecommunications infrastructure management
- Computer facilities management services
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
- Cost-plus contract type can lead to cost overruns.
- Short contract duration may indicate transitional need or inefficiency.
Tags
it-services, defense, department-of-the-army, mississippi, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, telecommunications, computer-facilities-management, large-contract, delivery-order
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $24.4 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN INTEGRATED SYSTEMS, LLC. R0I0040 ACE-IT TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LOCKHEED MARTIN INTEGRATED SYSTEMS, LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $24.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-10-09. End: 2010-09-30.
What specific telecommunications services were included under this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 541513 (Computer Facilities Management Services) and is titled 'ACE-IT TELECOMMUNICATIONS'. While specific service details are not fully elaborated, this typically encompasses the management, operation, and maintenance of computer systems and related telecommunications infrastructure. This could include network management, hardware and software support, data center operations, and ensuring the reliability and security of communication systems for the Department of the Army within the specified geographic area.
What is the typical cost structure for 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contracts, and what are the implications for this specific award?
A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract reimburses the contractor for all allowable costs incurred, plus a fixed fee, and an additional award fee based on the government's evaluation of the contractor's performance against predetermined criteria. For this $24.4 million contract, it means Lockheed Martin is reimbursed for its expenses in managing the telecommunications services. The 'award fee' component is intended to incentivize high performance. However, CPAF contracts can be complex to manage and require robust government oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and the award fee criteria are objective and fairly applied. The potential for higher final costs compared to fixed-price contracts exists if performance is exceptionally high or if cost controls are not rigorously enforced.
Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of through full and open competition?
The provided data simply states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED', indicating a sole-source award. Specific justifications for sole-source awards are typically documented by the procuring agency and can include reasons such as only one responsible source being available, urgent and compelling needs, or specific national security requirements. Without access to the agency's justification documentation (e.g., a Justification and Approval document), the precise reason for bypassing competition for this $24.4 million telecommunications contract remains unknown. This lack of competition limits transparency and the government's ability to ensure it received the best value.
How does the contract duration of 356 days impact the assessment of its value and strategic importance?
A contract duration of 356 days, just under a full year, suggests this was likely a short-term or transitional requirement. This duration might indicate a need for immediate support, a bridge to a larger, future contract, or a pilot program. For a $24.4 million award, a relatively short duration can sometimes raise questions about the efficiency of the procurement process if it necessitates frequent re-solicitations or extensions. It also limits the contractor's ability to achieve economies of scale or implement long-term strategic improvements, potentially impacting the overall value delivered to the government over an extended period.
What is the significance of the 'MS' (Mississippi) designation for this contract?
The 'MS' designation indicates that the services provided under this contract were primarily performed or delivered within the state of Mississippi. This has implications for the local economy, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the region related to telecommunications management and IT support. It also means that oversight and performance monitoring might be geographically focused within Mississippi. For the Department of the Army, it signifies a specific operational footprint or requirement within that state for telecommunications infrastructure.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Facilities Management Services
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)
Address: 2001 JEFFERSON DAVIS HWY, STE 900, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $24,401,583
Exercised Options: $24,401,583
Current Obligation: $24,401,583
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W91WMC07D0001
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-10-09
Current End Date: 2010-09-30
Potential End Date: 2010-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2020-05-29
More Contracts from Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC
- 200407!000098!5700!LA01 !11 Cons/Lgcw !FA701204C0003 !A!N! !N! ! !20031121!20130630!836196972!805258373!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Integrated SYS!6801 Rockledge Drive !bethesda !nj!20817!50000!001!11!washington !district of Columbia !D.C. !+000010350876!n!n!000530185344!d399!other Adp&telecommunication Services !S1 !services !000 !* !541690!A!B!3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!b!b!y!b! !a!n!l!2!007!b! !C!Y!F! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !b!z!a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $679.5M (Department of Defense)
- 200611!007847!2100!w15p7t!usa Communications-Electronics !daab0703db009 !A!N! !Y!0243 ! !20060831!20110129!068514251!805258373!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Integrated SYS!1800 Route 34 !wall !nj!07719!76460!025!34!wall (township OF) !monmouth !NEW Jersey!+000077463827!n!n!000000000000!r414!systems Engineering Services !A7 !electronics and Communication Equip !000 !NOT Discernable !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!y!2!014!b! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !c!z!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $448.3M (Department of Defense)
- ISS Cargo Mission Contract (CMC) — $406.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE Moses II Effort IS a Five-Year Sole-Source Follow-On Contract to Maintain the Health and Safety of the HST Observatory Through the Next Phase of ITS Science Mission. the Scope of This Follow-On Effort Includes Conducting ALL Elements of HST Operations Other Than Science Operations, and to Perform Systems Engineering Tasks Required to Properly Maintain HST Flight and Ground Systems.mission Operations Responsibilities Include Safe and Efficient Control and Utilization of the HST Observatory, Maintenance and Operation of Hst-Unique Facilities and Equipment, AS Well AS Creation, Maintenance, and Utilization of HST Operations Processes and Procedures. Critical Systems Engineering Responsibilities Consist of Optimizing Mission System Capabilities to Maximize HST Operations Effectiveness and Science Productivity. Essential Management Requirements Include Providing a Technical Staff Possessing In-Depth Knowledge of HST S Varied, Complex, and Unique Flight and Ground Systems, Ensuring Successful Accomplishment of the Diverse Tasks Necessary to Effectively Conduct HST Mission Operations and Systems Engineering AS Well AS to Manage and Report Contract Element Cost and Schedule Performance — $360.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Federal Contract — $304.3M (Department of Defense)
View all Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC federal contracts →
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)