FCC Awards $14.4M Enterprise Engineering Contract to Securience LLC, Not Competed Under SAP

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,426,939 ($14.4M)

Contractor: Securigence LLC

Awarding Agency: Federal Communications Commission

Start Date: 2022-09-20

End Date: 2026-09-18

Contract Duration: 1,459 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: LEESBURG, LOUDOUN County, VIRGINIA, 20176

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Federal Communications Commission obligated $14.4 million to SECURIGENCE LLC for work described as: ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded to Securience LLC for enterprise engineering and architecture services. 2. The contract value is $14.4 million over approximately 4 years. 3. The award was made under a BPA Call and was not competed under SAP. 4. The NAICS code 541519 suggests services related to other computer-related services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's pricing is difficult to assess without a competitive benchmark. As a BPA Call, it may leverage pre-negotiated rates, but the lack of specific competition for this task order limits direct comparison.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not competed under SAP, indicating a limited competition approach, likely through a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) call. This method may not ensure the best possible price discovery compared to a fully competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition raises questions about whether taxpayers received the best value. Without open competition, there's a risk of paying a premium for these services.

Public Impact

Citizens rely on the FCC for effective regulation, and these services support that mission. The contract's duration impacts long-term planning for FCC's technological infrastructure. Transparency in contracting is crucial for public trust in government operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition
Lack of SAP competition

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract type
Long-term duration allows for planning

Sector Analysis

The IT services sector is highly dynamic. Benchmarking against similar enterprise engineering and architecture services contracts is essential to ensure fair pricing, especially when competition is limited.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The use of a BPA Call suggests existing oversight mechanisms are in place. However, the lack of competition warrants scrutiny to ensure accountability and value for taxpayer money.

Related Government Programs

Other Computer Related Services
Federal Communications Commission Contracting
Federal Communications Commission Programs

Risk Flags

Limited competition raises value concerns.
Lack of SAP competition may indicate missed opportunities for better pricing.
Contract duration could lock in potentially suboptimal pricing.
No clear indication of small business subcontracting.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Federal Communications Commission awarded $14.4 million to SECURIGENCE LLC. ENTERPRISE ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURE SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SECURIGENCE LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Federal Communications Commission (Federal Communications Commission).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-09-20. End: 2026-09-18.

What was the justification for not competing this BPA Call under SAP, and how does it align with federal acquisition regulations for limited competition?

The justification for not competing under SAP would typically stem from specific circumstances outlined in acquisition regulations, such as urgency, existing contract vehicles, or unique capabilities. Without further details, it's difficult to assess alignment. Agencies often use BPA calls to streamline procurement for services already anticipated under a broader agreement, but the rationale for bypassing SAP competition needs clear documentation to ensure fairness and compliance.

How does the $14.4 million contract value compare to industry benchmarks for similar enterprise engineering and architecture services, considering the limited competition?

Benchmarking this $14.4 million contract against industry standards for enterprise engineering and architecture services is challenging due to the limited competition. Typically, competitive bids provide a clear market price. In a non-competed BPA call scenario, the pricing might be based on pre-negotiated rates that could be higher or lower than market rates. A thorough review would involve comparing the specific services and deliverables against publicly available data for similar government or commercial contracts.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a multi-year contract for critical IT services without full and open competition, particularly regarding service quality and cost overruns?

Awarding a multi-year contract without full and open competition carries risks of suboptimal service quality and potential cost overruns. Limited competition can reduce the incentive for the contractor to maintain high standards or offer competitive pricing throughout the contract term. Without the pressure of competing bids, there's a greater chance of price creep or a decline in service responsiveness. Robust performance monitoring and clear contract terms are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Other Computer Related Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › IT AND TELECOM - APLLICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 50 CATOCTIN CIR NE STE 310, LEESBURG, VA, 20176

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,526,689

Exercised Options: $17,235,223

Current Obligation: $14,426,939

Actual Outlays: $13,723,068

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 2

Total Subaward Amount: $3,027,062

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 273FCC22A0015

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline