DOJ awards $10.1M for investigative services, with a 108% price increase over prior contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,113,000 ($10.1M)

Contractor: Madison Associates Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2025-10-01

End Date: 2028-04-24

Contract Duration: 936 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: ASSET FORFEITURE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES FOR HSTF/FBI

Place of Performance

Location: LEESBURG, LOUDOUN County, VIRGINIA, 20177

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $10.1 million to MADISON ASSOCIATES INC for work described as: ASSET FORFEITURE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES FOR HSTF/FBI Key points: 1. Significant price escalation compared to previous contract. 2. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive market. 3. Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing structure. 4. Services align with FBI's asset forfeiture and investigative needs. 5. Contract duration extends over 3.5 years, indicating long-term reliance. 6. No small business set-aside, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The awarded amount of $10.1 million for investigative services represents a substantial increase compared to the prior contract, which was valued at $108,040. This nearly 108% price jump warrants scrutiny. While the specific services may have expanded or changed, the significant escalation suggests potential issues with pricing or scope creep. Benchmarking against similar investigative service contracts would be necessary to determine if the current pricing is justified by market rates or if it indicates an overpayment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while the competition was open, certain sources were initially excluded. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed but suggest a deliberate process to narrow the field before the final open competition. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open nature implies multiple interested parties participated, which is generally positive for price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The open competition, despite initial exclusions, suggests that taxpayers benefited from a process designed to solicit multiple offers, potentially leading to a more competitive price than a sole-source award.

Public Impact

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will receive enhanced investigative and asset forfeiture support. Services will aid in the disruption and dismantling of criminal organizations. Potential impact on law enforcement effectiveness in asset recovery. Workforce implications include the need for specialized investigative personnel. Geographic impact is likely nationwide, supporting federal law enforcement efforts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Significant price increase from prior contract raises concerns about value for money.
Time and Materials (T&M) contract type can lead to cost uncertainty and potential overruns if not closely managed.
The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type needs further clarification to ensure fairness and maximum competition.
Lack of small business participation noted, which could limit opportunities for smaller, specialized firms.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a structured procurement process.
Contract duration of over 3.5 years suggests a stable and predictable service delivery.
Services directly support critical law enforcement functions of the FBI.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on investigation and personal background check services (NAICS 561611). This sector is crucial for government operations, providing specialized expertise that agencies often cannot maintain in-house. The market for investigative services is competitive, with numerous firms offering a range of capabilities. The FBI's reliance on such services for asset forfeiture and complex investigations is typical, reflecting the increasing need for specialized analytical and field support in combating sophisticated criminal activities.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary awardee, Madison Associates Inc., is likely a larger entity, or that the contract's nature did not lend itself to a small business set-aside. The absence of explicit small business provisions could mean limited direct opportunities for small businesses on this specific contract, though they may participate indirectly through the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily reside with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a division of the Department of Justice. The contract is a Delivery Order under an existing contract vehicle, implying that the initial award and terms were subject to a broader oversight process. The Time and Materials pricing structure necessitates robust monitoring of hours and costs to ensure accountability and prevent overspending. The Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations into potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Asset Forfeiture Program
Federal Law Enforcement Support Services
Investigative Services Contracts
Department of Justice Procurement

Risk Flags

Significant price increase compared to prior contract.
Time and Materials pricing structure carries cost overrun risk.
Competition type 'after exclusion of sources' requires further review for fairness.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $10.1 million to MADISON ASSOCIATES INC. ASSET FORFEITURE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES FOR HSTF/FBI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MADISON ASSOCIATES INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-10-01. End: 2028-04-24.

What specific services are included under 'ASSET FORFEITURE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES' and how do they differ from previous contract requirements?

The provided data does not detail the specific services encompassed by 'ASSET FORFEITURE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES.' However, based on the NAICS code (561611 - Investigation and Personal Background Check Services), these services likely include activities such as background investigations, surveillance, evidence gathering, witness interviews, and potentially forensic analysis related to asset forfeiture cases. The significant price increase from $108,040 to $10.1 million suggests either a substantial expansion in the scope and volume of services required, a significant change in the complexity of the investigations, or an escalation in market rates for such specialized expertise. Without a detailed Statement of Work (SOW) or contract modifications, it is difficult to pinpoint the exact differences, but the financial data strongly implies a much larger or more intensive service requirement than previously.

How does the 108% price increase compare to industry benchmarks for similar investigative services?

A 108% price increase from a prior contract value of $108,040 to $10.1 million is exceptionally high and warrants significant scrutiny. Without specific details on the services rendered in the prior contract versus the current one, a direct benchmark is challenging. However, typical annual inflation rates are in the low single digits. A jump of this magnitude suggests factors beyond standard inflation, such as a vastly expanded scope, increased complexity, a shift to higher-cost service delivery models, or potentially uncompetitive pricing in the current award. Industry benchmarks for investigative services vary widely based on specialization, duration, and required expertise. A comparison would require analyzing contracts with similar NAICS codes (561611) and service descriptions (asset forfeiture, federal investigations) awarded around the same period. If the scope of work has remained comparable, this price increase would be considered highly anomalous and potentially indicative of poor value for money.

What are the risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for these services?

The Time and Materials (T&M) contract type, used for this award, presents inherent risks for the government, primarily related to cost control. In a T&M contract, the government pays the contractor for the actual labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the cost of materials used. This structure can lead to cost uncertainty and potential overruns if the contractor's efficiency is low or if the scope of work expands unexpectedly. Unlike fixed-price contracts, there is less incentive for the contractor to control costs or complete the work efficiently. For the government, effective oversight is crucial to monitor labor hours, ensure rates are reasonable, and verify that materials are necessary and priced appropriately. Without stringent management and surveillance, T&M contracts can become significantly more expensive than initially anticipated, potentially leading to budget challenges and reduced value for taxpayer money.

What does 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' imply for the procurement process and potential bidder pool?

The term 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' indicates a nuanced procurement approach. Initially, the agency likely identified a specific set of potential sources it intended to solicit from, excluding others based on predefined criteria (e.g., specific capabilities, past performance, security clearances). Following this initial exclusion, the remaining qualified sources were then invited to compete fully and openly. This suggests the agency had a particular need or understanding of the market that led them to narrow the field upfront, possibly to ensure specialized expertise or to streamline the evaluation process. While it still allows for open competition among the selected group, it implies that the pool of bidders might have been smaller than in a truly unrestricted full and open competition. The justification for excluding certain sources would typically need to be documented by the agency to ensure fairness and compliance with procurement regulations.

How does the duration of the contract (over 3.5 years) align with the typical needs for asset forfeiture investigative services?

A contract duration of over 3.5 years (936 days) for asset forfeiture investigative services suggests a long-term, ongoing need for these capabilities within the FBI or the Department of Justice. Asset forfeiture investigations are often complex and protracted, involving the tracing of illicit funds, identification of assets, and legal proceedings to seize and forfeit those assets. Such investigations require sustained effort, specialized knowledge, and consistent support. A multi-year contract provides stability for the contractor to develop expertise, build relationships, and ensure continuity of service, which can be beneficial for complex, long-term cases. It also allows the agency to budget more predictably for these essential law enforcement functions. The extended duration aligns with the nature of sophisticated financial crime investigations and the lengthy legal processes involved in asset forfeiture.

What is the historical spending pattern for 'ASSET FORFEITURE INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES' by the FBI or DOJ?

The provided data only includes information for the current contract award ($10.1 million) and a single prior contract value ($108,040). This limited snapshot makes it difficult to establish a comprehensive historical spending pattern. The vast difference between the prior award and the current one ($108,040 vs. $10.1 million) suggests either a significant shift in the agency's requirements, a change in how these services are procured (e.g., moving from task orders to a larger contract vehicle), or a substantial increase in the market cost of these services. To understand historical spending, one would need to examine a broader range of past contracts, task orders, and potentially other contract vehicles used by the FBI and DOJ for similar investigative and asset forfeiture support over several fiscal years.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Investigation and Personal Background Check Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 19812 ALDIE BURN LN, LEESBURG, VA, 20175

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,531,350

Exercised Options: $30,531,350

Current Obligation: $10,113,000

Actual Outlays: $1,904,267

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 15JPSS23D00000069

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline