DOE awards $5.2M contract for Athena development to Giant Oak, Inc., with no competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $5,236,559 ($5.2M)
Contractor: Giant OAK, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2022-03-28
End Date: 2027-03-27
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $2.9K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS
Sector: Other
Official Description: COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT OF ATHENA FOR FERC.
Place of Performance
Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22201
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $5.2 million to GIANT OAK, INC. for work described as: COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT OF ATHENA FOR FERC. Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies and market-driven pricing. 2. The contract duration of five years suggests a long-term need for the Athena development services. 3. Focus on 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' indicates a specialized, knowledge-based requirement. 4. The award to a single vendor limits opportunities for broader industry engagement and innovation. 5. Performance is being tracked under the 'VA' category, suggesting a focus on value and accountability. 6. The absence of small business set-aside or subcontracting requirements may limit broader economic impact.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and the specific, potentially niche, nature of 'Athena development'. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to ascertain if the $5.2 million price represents a fair market value or if alternative, more cost-effective solutions exist. The contract's structure, based on labor hours, can also lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. Further analysis would require understanding the scope of 'Athena' and comparing the labor rates to industry standards for similar consulting services.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a 'NOT COMPETED' basis, indicating that a full and open competition was not conducted. This typically occurs when a specific vendor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or when there is an urgent need that precludes a competitive process. The lack of competition means that only one offer was solicited and evaluated, preventing price discovery through market forces and potentially leading to higher costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may not be benefiting from the most cost-effective solution available in the market. Without multiple bids, there is less pressure on the contractor to offer competitive pricing, potentially resulting in a higher overall expenditure for this service.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which will receive the developed 'Athena' system. The service delivered is the completion of development for a system named 'Athena', likely a software or data analysis platform. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Energy's operational sphere, with potential national implications depending on Athena's function. Workforce implications are likely concentrated within the contractor, Giant Oak, Inc., and potentially within FERC for system integration and use.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing and innovation.
- Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-sourcing.
- Potential for cost overruns given the labor hours contract type.
- No explicit small business subcontracting goals may limit broader economic participation.
Positive Signals
- Contract awarded to a single entity suggests specialized expertise relevant to the project.
- Clear contract end date provides a defined period for development.
- The contract is managed by the Department of Energy, a major federal agency with established oversight processes.
Sector Analysis
The contract falls within the 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' NAICS code (541690), a broad category encompassing specialized advisory and analytical services. This sector is characterized by knowledge-intensive work, often involving proprietary methodologies or deep expertise. The market size for such services is substantial within the federal government, supporting a wide range of agency missions. This specific contract for 'Athena development' likely addresses a unique requirement within FERC's operational framework, potentially related to data analytics, regulatory compliance, or energy market monitoring.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to include any specific small business set-aside provisions, nor is there an indication of mandatory subcontracting goals for small businesses. The award to a single entity, Giant Oak, Inc., without explicit small business participation requirements, suggests that the primary focus was on acquiring the specific capabilities needed for Athena's development. This approach may limit opportunities for small businesses to participate in this particular federal spending, although Giant Oak, Inc. may voluntarily engage small businesses as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). As a definitive contract awarded on a sole-source basis, the justification for this procurement method would be subject to review. The contract's performance will likely be monitored through regular reporting requirements and milestone achievements. Transparency regarding the development progress and expenditures may be limited due to the non-competitive nature, but standard federal procurement regulations and potential Inspector General reviews would apply.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) IT Modernization Efforts
- Department of Energy (DOE) Data Analytics and Software Development Contracts
- Scientific and Technical Consulting Services for Energy Sector Regulation
- Sole-Source IT Development Contracts
- Labor Hour Contract Vehicles
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award raises concerns about competition and potential overpricing.
- Lack of transparency regarding the justification for not competing the contract.
- Potential for cost overruns due to labor-hour contract type.
- Contract duration of five years requires careful monitoring of performance and evolving needs.
Tags
other-scientific-and-technical-consulting-services, department-of-energy, federal-energy-regulatory-commission, definitive-contract, sole-source, labor-hours, software-development, virginia, large-contract, scientific-consulting
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $5.2 million to GIANT OAK, INC.. COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT OF ATHENA FOR FERC.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GIANT OAK, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $5.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2022-03-28. End: 2027-03-27.
What is the specific function and purpose of the 'Athena' system being developed?
The provided data does not specify the exact function or purpose of the 'Athena' system. However, given its development under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Department of Energy (DOE), it is likely related to energy market analysis, regulatory compliance, grid management, or data processing for energy sector oversight. The NAICS code 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' suggests a complex analytical or technical solution. Further details would likely be found in the contract's statement of work or related documentation, which are not publicly available in this dataset. Understanding Athena's role is crucial for assessing the necessity and value of the $5.2 million investment.
What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The data indicates the contract was awarded on a 'NOT COMPETED' basis, meaning a sole-source justification was likely invoked. Common reasons for sole-sourcing include unique capabilities, proprietary technology, urgent and compelling needs, or when only one responsible source exists. Without access to the specific justification document, it's impossible to determine the precise reason. However, for a contract of this value and duration, the government would typically need to demonstrate that competition was not feasible or would not be in the government's best interest. This could involve asserting that Giant Oak, Inc. possesses exclusive rights or specialized expertise essential for the 'Athena' development that cannot be replicated by other firms.
How does the $5.2 million cost compare to similar federal contracts for technical consulting or software development?
Directly comparing the $5.2 million cost is difficult without knowing the specific scope and deliverables of the 'Athena' development. However, for a five-year contract involving specialized technical consulting and development, this figure is within a plausible range for federal projects. The key concern with sole-source awards is the lack of competitive benchmarking. If this were competed, the government might have secured similar services for less, or received more extensive services for the same price. Benchmarking would ideally involve comparing the estimated labor hours, rates, and project complexity against other sole-source or competitively awarded contracts for similar technical services within the Department of Energy or other agencies.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this magnitude and duration?
Sole-source contracts carry inherent risks, including the potential for inflated pricing due to lack of competition, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or perform efficiently, and a lack of transparency in the procurement process. For a $5.2 million contract spanning five years, risks include cost overruns if the labor-hour basis is not tightly managed, scope creep, and the possibility that the developed 'Athena' system may not fully meet evolving needs if market alternatives are not considered. Furthermore, the government is reliant on a single vendor, creating a dependency that could be problematic if the vendor faces financial difficulties or fails to deliver as expected.
What is Giant Oak, Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Energy or FERC?
The provided data identifies Giant Oak, Inc. as the contractor. A comprehensive assessment of their track record would require accessing federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) to review their past performance on federal contracts. Key areas to examine would include contract values, types of services provided, past performance ratings, any instances of contract disputes or terminations, and their experience with similar projects or agencies. Without this external data, it's impossible to evaluate Giant Oak, Inc.'s specific qualifications and history relevant to this 'Athena' development contract.
What are the historical spending patterns for 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' at FERC or DOE?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' at FERC and DOE would involve examining procurement data over several fiscal years. This would reveal the typical contract values, the frequency of sole-source awards versus competitive bids in this category, and the primary contractors engaged. Such analysis could indicate whether this $5.2 million sole-source award is an anomaly or part of a broader trend. It could also highlight whether FERC or DOE frequently procures similar services, providing context for the necessity and scale of the 'Athena' development project.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › General Science and Technology R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Solicitation ID: E-MAIL
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 2300 WILSON BLVD STE 700, ARLINGTON, VA, 22201
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $5,798,137
Exercised Options: $5,236,559
Current Obligation: $5,236,559
Actual Outlays: $3,572,872
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2022-03-28
Current End Date: 2027-03-27
Potential End Date: 2027-03-27 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-02-23
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)