GSA's $256M Network Defense Task Order Group F to CGI Federal Inc. awarded under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $256,341,404 ($256.3M)

Contractor: CGI Federal Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2020-05-05

End Date: 2026-05-04

Contract Duration: 2,190 days

Daily Burn Rate: $117.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: DYNAMIC AND EVOLVING FEDERAL ENTERPRISE NETWORK DEFENSE TASK ORDER GROUP F (DEFEND F)

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22209

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $256.3 million to CGI FEDERAL INC. for work described as: DYNAMIC AND EVOLVING FEDERAL ENTERPRISE NETWORK DEFENSE TASK ORDER GROUP F (DEFEND F) Key points: 1. The contract's value of over $256 million over its potential lifespan indicates a significant investment in federal network defense capabilities. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, this suggests a robust market for these services, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type introduces performance incentives, aiming to drive efficiency and effectiveness in network defense. 4. The task order is part of a larger group (DEFEND F), implying a strategic, consolidated approach to acquiring network security services. 5. The duration of the contract (5 years) allows for sustained support and adaptation to evolving cybersecurity threats. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates that the primary competition was not specifically targeted towards small businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

Benchmarking the value of this specific task order against similar large-scale network defense contracts is challenging without more granular data on the scope of services. However, the $256 million ceiling over five years suggests a substantial investment, aligning with the critical nature of federal cybersecurity. The CPAF structure allows for flexibility in payment based on performance, which can be a value-driver if managed effectively. Comparing the per-task order value within the broader DEFEND F contract would provide further insight into its relative cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 7 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant network defense task order. A competitive environment like this generally benefits the government by fostering price discovery and encouraging contractors to offer their best value propositions to secure the award.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely resulted in a more favorable price than a sole-source or limited competition award. It ensures that taxpayer funds are being used efficiently by leveraging market forces to obtain quality services at a competitive rate.

Public Impact

Federal agencies relying on secure networks will benefit from enhanced cybersecurity measures and incident response capabilities. The services delivered are critical for protecting sensitive government data and maintaining the operational integrity of federal IT systems. The contract's impact is national, supporting the security of federal infrastructure across various departments and agencies. The contract supports a workforce skilled in cybersecurity, network administration, and IT support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The CPAF structure, while incentivizing, can lead to cost overruns if award fee criteria are not tightly managed and objectively assessed.
The large contract value could present a significant concentration of risk if the contractor experiences performance issues or financial instability.
Reliance on a single task order for a broad range of network defense services might limit flexibility in adopting niche or rapidly evolving security solutions.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition with multiple bidders, indicating a competitive market and potential for good value.
The task order is part of a larger, strategic group (DEFEND F), suggesting a well-planned approach to federal network defense.
The contract duration allows for sustained support and adaptation to the dynamic cybersecurity threat landscape.
The CPAF structure provides an opportunity to incentivize high performance and achieve superior outcomes in network defense.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Computer Systems Design Services sector, a critical component of the broader IT services industry. The federal government is a major consumer of these services, particularly for cybersecurity and network management, given the increasing sophistication of cyber threats. The market for federal IT services is substantial, with agencies like GSA playing a key role in facilitating procurement. This task order represents a significant portion of spending within this niche, reflecting the government's ongoing commitment to bolstering its digital defenses.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the contractor, CGI Federal Inc., is a large business. This indicates that the competition was not specifically structured to benefit small businesses. While there is no direct subcontracting requirement explicitly stated here, large federal contracts often include provisions for small business subcontracting. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether CGI Federal Inc. actively seeks out small businesses for subcontracting opportunities to fulfill parts of this task order.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is primarily managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), which awarded the task order under the Federal Acquisition Service. The CPAF structure implies performance monitoring against defined award fee criteria. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Accountability measures are inherent in the CPAF structure, linking payment to performance. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically fall under the agency overseeing the contract's performance and funding, which in this case would be GSA.

Related Government Programs

DEFEND F Task Order Group
GSA IT Schedule 70
Federal Cybersecurity Initiatives
Network Security Services
IT Professional Services

Risk Flags

Contract Duration
Performance-Based Contract Type
Large Contract Value

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $256.3 million to CGI FEDERAL INC.. DYNAMIC AND EVOLVING FEDERAL ENTERPRISE NETWORK DEFENSE TASK ORDER GROUP F (DEFEND F)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CGI FEDERAL INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $256.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-05-05. End: 2026-05-04.

What is the historical spending pattern for network defense services under GSA's Federal Acquisition Service?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for network defense services under GSA's Federal Acquisition Service reveals a consistent and growing trend. Agencies increasingly rely on GSA for IT services, including cybersecurity, due to its established procurement vehicles and expertise. Spending in this area has escalated year-over-year, driven by the evolving threat landscape, modernization efforts, and the sheer volume of sensitive data managed by federal entities. GSA's IT Schedule 70, and now its successor vehicles, have been primary channels for these procurements. The DEFEND F contract group itself represents a consolidation and strategic approach to managing these significant investments, indicating a move towards more structured and larger-scale acquisitions for critical services like network defense. This pattern suggests that federal agencies view robust network defense not as a discretionary expense, but as a fundamental requirement for operational continuity and national security, leading to sustained and substantial budgetary allocations.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure compare to other contract types for cybersecurity services?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type is often employed for complex services like cybersecurity where performance outcomes can be difficult to define precisely upfront but are critical to success. Unlike Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, which offer price certainty but can be inflexible, CPAF allows for costs to be reimbursed plus a fee that is earned based on meeting or exceeding performance objectives. This contrasts with Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF), where the fee is fixed regardless of performance. For cybersecurity, CPAF offers a balance: it provides flexibility to adapt to changing threats and requirements while incentivizing the contractor to deliver high-quality, effective security solutions through the award fee component. However, it requires robust government oversight to ensure the award criteria are objective and that the fee accurately reflects performance, preventing potential cost creep if not managed diligently.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically associated with network defense task orders of this magnitude?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for network defense task orders of this magnitude typically focus on threat detection, incident response, system availability, and compliance. Examples include Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) and Mean Time to Respond (MTTR) to security incidents, which measure the efficiency of the defense team. System uptime and availability percentages for protected networks are crucial for operational continuity. Compliance with federal cybersecurity mandates (e.g., NIST, FISMA) is also a critical KPI. Furthermore, metrics related to vulnerability management, such as the percentage of critical vulnerabilities patched within a defined timeframe, and the number of successful security audits or penetration tests, are often included. For a CPAF contract, these KPIs would be directly tied to the award fee criteria, incentivizing the contractor to excel in these critical areas.

What is CGI Federal Inc.'s track record with large federal IT and cybersecurity contracts?

CGI Federal Inc. has a substantial track record of performance on large federal IT and cybersecurity contracts across various agencies. As a major global IT consulting firm with a significant U.S. federal presence, CGI has consistently secured and executed complex programs. Their portfolio includes work in areas such as IT modernization, system integration, cybersecurity, and mission support for defense, civilian, and intelligence agencies. While specific performance details for every contract are not publicly available, their continued success in winning competitive bids for large-scale government procurements suggests a generally positive performance history and capability to meet stringent federal requirements. Reviewing contract award data and past performance evaluations, where available, would provide a more granular assessment of their specific strengths and any past challenges.

How does the $256 million contract value compare to overall federal spending on cybersecurity?

The $256 million contract value for this specific network defense task order is significant in absolute terms but represents a fraction of the overall federal spending on cybersecurity. The U.S. federal government allocates tens of billions of dollars annually towards cybersecurity initiatives, encompassing a wide array of programs, technologies, and services across numerous agencies. This includes spending on infrastructure protection, threat intelligence, workforce development, research and development, and incident response capabilities. While this particular contract is substantial for GSA and CGI Federal, it is one of many large-scale investments made government-wide to address the pervasive and evolving cyber threats. Therefore, it should be viewed as a key component within a much larger, comprehensive federal cybersecurity strategy.

What are the potential risks associated with a 5-year contract for dynamic cybersecurity services?

A 5-year contract for dynamic cybersecurity services carries several potential risks. Firstly, the rapid pace of technological advancement and the evolving nature of cyber threats mean that the specific technologies and strategies relevant today might be less effective or even obsolete by the end of the contract term. This requires significant flexibility and continuous adaptation from both the contractor and the government. Secondly, there's a risk of vendor lock-in, where the government becomes heavily reliant on the contractor's specific solutions, making it difficult and costly to switch providers or adopt new, potentially superior technologies. Thirdly, maintaining consistent performance and motivation from the contractor over a long period can be challenging; award fee structures help mitigate this, but require diligent oversight. Finally, the sheer scale and duration increase the potential impact of any performance failures or security breaches attributed to the contractor.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Timken Company

Address: 12601 FAIR LAKES CIR # 100, FAIRFAX, VA, 22033

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $334,707,626

Exercised Options: $330,420,477

Current Obligation: $256,341,404

Actual Outlays: $-359,188

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 215

Total Subaward Amount: $60,628,436

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QTCK18D0022

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline