DOT's $10.6M Radio ACLS Needs Package contract awarded to Peraton Inc. for Computer Systems Design Services
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $10,652,860 ($10.7M)
Contractor: Peraton Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation
Start Date: 2026-01-09
End Date: 2028-12-31
Contract Duration: 1,087 days
Daily Burn Rate: $9.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: THIS DELIVERY ORDER IS FOR THE RADIO- ACLS NEEDS PACKAGE. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL EFFECT.
Place of Performance
Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20591
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Transportation obligated $10.7 million to PERATON INC. for work described as: THIS DELIVERY ORDER IS FOR THE RADIO- ACLS NEEDS PACKAGE. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL EFFECT. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for essential radio communication system upgrades. 2. Long-term contract duration of nearly 3 years. 3. Cost-plus award fee contract type allows for performance incentives. 4. Services include computer systems design, crucial for modern aviation. 5. Contract awarded through full and open competition. 6. Potential for future task orders under this contract.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's value of $10.6 million for a nearly three-year period for specialized computer systems design services appears reasonable. While specific benchmarks for 'Radio ACLS Needs Packages' are not readily available, the cost-plus award fee structure suggests an incentive for efficient performance. Benchmarking against similar IT service contracts for government agencies indicates that pricing is likely competitive, especially given the full and open competition.
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 specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters a competitive environment, which should lead to better pricing and service offerings for the government. The FAA's commitment to open competition suggests a robust process for selecting the most capable and cost-effective solution.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition ensures that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by leveraging market forces to obtain the best value. This approach minimizes the risk of overpayment and encourages innovation from a wide range of potential contractors.
Public Impact
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits from enhanced radio communication capabilities. Aviation safety and efficiency are improved through updated ACLS systems. The District of Columbia is the primary geographic impact area. The contract supports the IT services sector workforce.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of specific bidder count limits full assessment of competitive intensity.
- Cost-plus award fee contracts can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed closely.
- The specific 'ACLS Needs Package' details are not fully elaborated, making precise value assessment challenging.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
- Long contract duration provides stability for service delivery and planning.
- The use of an award fee structure incentivizes contractor performance.
- Services are critical for maintaining and improving aviation infrastructure.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on computer systems design. The market for government IT services is substantial, with agencies continually investing in modernization and specialized solutions. This contract for aviation-specific communication systems represents a niche within the larger IT landscape, requiring expertise in both technology and regulatory compliance for air traffic control.
Small Business Impact
The provided data does not indicate any small business set-aside provisions for this contract. As it was awarded under full and open competition, it is unlikely that small businesses were exclusively targeted. However, Peraton Inc., as the prime contractor, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, contributing to the small business ecosystem, though this is not explicitly detailed.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) contracting officers and program managers. The cost-plus award fee structure necessitates close monitoring of performance against defined criteria to ensure value for money. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms, and any issues would fall under the purview of the DOT's Office of Inspector General.
Related Government Programs
- FAA Air Traffic Control Modernization Programs
- Federal IT Services Procurement
- Aviation Communication Systems Contracts
Risk Flags
- Technology obsolescence risk due to long contract duration.
- Potential for cost overruns in a Cost-Plus contract.
- Cybersecurity vulnerabilities in critical aviation infrastructure.
- Dependence on a single contractor for essential communication systems.
Tags
it-services, computer-systems-design, aviation, air-traffic-control, department-of-transportation, federal-aviation-administration, cost-plus-award-fee, delivery-order, full-and-open-competition, district-of-columbia, peraton-inc
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Transportation awarded $10.7 million to PERATON INC.. THIS DELIVERY ORDER IS FOR THE RADIO- ACLS NEEDS PACKAGE. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL EFFECT.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is PERATON INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $10.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2026-01-09. End: 2028-12-31.
What is the historical spending pattern for Peraton Inc. with the Department of Transportation, specifically for similar IT services?
Analyzing Peraton Inc.'s historical spending with the Department of Transportation (DOT) for similar IT services requires access to comprehensive federal procurement databases. While this specific contract is for $10.6 million, Peraton has a significant presence across various federal agencies, including the DOT, often securing large-scale IT and mission support contracts. To provide a precise historical spending pattern, one would need to query databases like FPDS or USASpending for all contracts awarded to Peraton by the DOT, filtering for NAICS codes related to Computer Systems Design Services (like 541512) and potentially other relevant categories. This would reveal the volume, value, and types of services Peraton has previously provided to the DOT, allowing for a comparison of this current contract's scale and scope against their established relationship with the agency. Without direct access to such granular historical data, it's difficult to definitively state their spending pattern, but their general profile suggests they are a major contractor capable of handling significant federal IT investments.
How does the cost-plus award fee (CPAF) structure compare to other contract types for similar aviation IT projects?
The Cost-Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type is often utilized when the scope of work is well-defined but performance outcomes can vary significantly, and the government wants to incentivize exceptional contractor performance. For similar aviation IT projects, other common contract types include Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF), and Time and Materials (T&M). FFP contracts offer the most price certainty for the government but are less suitable when technical uncertainties are high or innovation is paramount. CPFF provides cost reimbursement plus a fixed fee, offering less incentive for cost control than CPAF. T&M contracts are typically used for smaller projects or when the scope is highly uncertain and evolves rapidly. CPAF strikes a balance by reimbursing costs and providing a base fee, with the potential for additional award fees tied to specific performance metrics. This structure is beneficial for complex projects like the ACLS Needs Package where achieving high levels of system reliability, integration, and operational efficiency is critical, and where the government wishes to reward the contractor for exceeding baseline performance expectations.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) likely used to determine the award fee for this contract?
For a Cost-Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract like this one for the Radio ACLS Needs Package, the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee are crucial for incentivizing the contractor, Peraton Inc., to achieve optimal results. While the specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, they would typically align with the critical aspects of computer systems design and implementation for aviation communication. Likely KPIs could include: system reliability and uptime, measured as a percentage of operational availability; successful integration with existing air traffic control systems; adherence to stringent aviation safety and security standards; timely delivery of milestones and final product; responsiveness to technical issues and support requests; and overall system performance efficiency (e.g., signal clarity, latency reduction). The FAA would establish a performance evaluation plan outlining these metrics, their weighting, and the criteria for achieving different levels of award fees, ranging from unsatisfactory to exceptional performance.
What is the potential risk associated with the long duration (nearly 3 years) of this contract?
The nearly three-year duration of this contract presents several potential risks that require careful management. Firstly, technology obsolescence is a significant concern in the IT sector; systems designed and implemented today could be outdated by the end of the contract period, especially in rapidly evolving areas like radio communication and air traffic control. Secondly, cost escalation is a risk, particularly with Cost-Plus contracts, as unforeseen challenges or changes in market rates for labor and materials over an extended period can increase the overall expenditure beyond initial projections. Thirdly, contractor performance degradation over time is possible; initial enthusiasm and quality may wane, necessitating robust oversight and performance management to maintain standards. Finally, changes in government requirements or priorities could necessitate contract modifications, potentially leading to scope creep or delays. The FAA must actively manage these risks through continuous monitoring, clear communication, and potentially incorporating flexibility clauses into the contract.
Are there any specific cybersecurity requirements or risks associated with this 'Radio ACLS Needs Package' contract?
Yes, cybersecurity requirements and risks are highly pertinent to any contract involving aviation communication systems, including this 'Radio ACLS Needs Package'. The integrity and security of air traffic control (ATC) communication are paramount for national security and public safety. Therefore, this contract would undoubtedly incorporate stringent cybersecurity requirements. These likely include adherence to federal cybersecurity frameworks (e.g., NIST guidelines), secure coding practices, robust access controls, encryption of sensitive data, regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing, and incident response planning. The risks are substantial: a successful cyberattack could disrupt air traffic, compromise safety, lead to data breaches, or even enable malicious actors to interfere with aircraft operations. The contractor, Peraton Inc., must demonstrate a strong cybersecurity posture and implement comprehensive security measures throughout the system's lifecycle, from design and development to deployment and maintenance, to mitigate these critical risks.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Veritas Capital Fund Management, L.L.C.
Address: 12975 WORLDGATE DR STE 7322, HERNDON, VA, 20170
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $64,320,813
Exercised Options: $28,100,336
Current Obligation: $10,652,860
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 693KA726D00003
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2026-01-09
Current End Date: 2028-12-31
Potential End Date: 2035-12-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-04-13
More Contracts from Peraton Inc.
- 200107!000034!5700!GZ80 !smc/Pks !F0470101C0001 !A!N!*!Y! !20001103!20061031!052819732!052819732!001216845!n!itt Industries, Inc , Systems !4410 E Fountain Blvd !colorado Sprin !co!80916!16000!041!08!colorado Springs !EL Paso !colorado !+000016429445!n!n!000000000000!ac26!rdte/Missile and Space Systems-Mgmt Support !A2 !missile and Space Systems !3000!NOT Discernable or Classified !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!B! !A !Y!R!2!003!B! !A!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !c!c!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! — $1.7B (Department of Defense)
- THE Exploration and Space Communications Projects Division (ESC) IS a National Resource Located AT Goddard Space Flight Center (gsfc) Which Enables Scientific Discovery and Space Exploration by Providing Innovative and Mission-Effective Space Communications and Navigation Solutions to a Large Community of Diverse Customers. ESC Manages Operational Geostationary Communications Relay Satellites and Ground Systems for the Space Communications and Navigation (scan) Program AT Nasa Headquarters. Today, Scan Network Systems Consist of the Space Network (SN), the Near Earth Network (NEN), and the Deep Space Network (DSN). the Day-To-Day Management of These Three Networks IS Currently NOT Fully Consistent. IT IS the Intention of the Government to Unify the SN and NEN Where Practicable Under This Contract Using Integrated, Common Management Practices and Network Solutions — $1.5B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Nasa Goddard Space Flight Center's (gsfc) Goal for the Space Communications Networks Services Contract (scns) IS to Enable Mission Success for Every Customer Using Scns Services. KEY Objectives of the Scns Contract ARE to Decrease Cost and Maintain or Improve Operational Efficiency and Reliability, While Maintaining an Acceptable Level of Risk and Providing for Safe Operation of the Missions. the Contractor Shall Implement a Safety, Health, and Mission Assurance Program That Provides a Safe and Healthy Work Environment, Minimizes Program Risk, and Maximizes Nasa Mission Success. the Contractor Shall BE Responsible and Accountable for Achieving the Required Results. Core Requirement Functions, Such AS Configuration Management, Quality Assurance, ETC. ARE Required to Support Idiq Task Orders. the Space Network (SN) IS Comprised of a Fleet of On-Orbit Tracking and Data Relay Satellites (tdrs) and Associated Ground Systems That Provide Telecommunications Services. the Nature of the SN Architecture, I.E., Extremely Large Capital Investment, Contractor Operated Facilities, Continuous 24X7 Requirements, ETC., Lends Itself to a Core Requirements Approach. the Ground Network (GN) Consists of an Orbital Tracking Network and the Satellite Laser Ranging Network. the Nature of the Ground Network Architecture, I.E., Diverse MIX of Commercial and Government Assets, Evolving Geographic and Technical Customer Requirements, and Legacy Systems, ETC. Lends Itself to an Idiq Approach. Other Activities, I.E., Very Long Baseline Interferometry Network Operations and Maintenance (O&M), Electronic System Test Laboratory, Requirements Development, Hardware and Software Development, ETC. ARE Best Suited to an Idiq Approach in the Resource-Constrained Environment That Nasa Operates in — $1.2B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Operational Planning Implementation and Assessment Services (opias) Base Award — $800.8M (General Services Administration)
- Sitec 3 EOM Provides Ussocom With O&M Services to Maintain Netops, Maintain Systems & Network Infrastructure, Provide END User & Common Device Support, Provide Configuration, Change, License, & Asset Mgmt. Conduct Training and Perform Imacs Services — $651.0M (General Services Administration)
Other Department of Transportation Contracts
- Dafis UDO Reconstruct W/O Advance — $3.8B (Lockheed Martin Services, LLC)
- THE Purpose of This Delivery Order Award IS to ADD Funding for FTI Telecommunications Services — $1.9B (Harris Corporation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Leidos, Inc.)
- Center for Advanced Aviation Development (caasd) Ffrdc Mitre — $1.7B (THE Mitre Corporation)
- Dafis UDO Reconstruct W/O Advance — $1.5B (Harris Corporation)