DoD's $18M contract with JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION for DCA services shows long-term engagement

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,984,595 ($18.0M)

Contractor: Jason Associates Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1999-12-14

End Date: 2007-12-31

Contract Duration: 2,939 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: IT

Place of Performance

Location: YUMA, YUMA County, ARIZONA, 85365

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $18.0 million to JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract duration of nearly 8 years suggests a sustained need for the services provided. 2. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight to manage costs. 3. The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating a specific justification for limiting initial bidders. 4. The significant duration and value may indicate a critical function for the Department of the Army. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted for small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $17,984,594.85 over nearly 8 years averages to approximately $2.3 million per year. Without specific details on the services provided (DCA - likely Defense Communications Agency or similar), direct comparison is difficult. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure can lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if not managed tightly, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fee that can be adjusted based on performance. Benchmarking this against similar long-term IT or communications support contracts would be necessary for a definitive value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This procurement method implies that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources were excluded for reasons documented by the agency. This could be due to specialized capabilities, prior performance, or other justifications. The fact that there were 2 bidders suggests some level of competition, but the exclusion of other potential sources limits the breadth of that competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition may have resulted in less aggressive pricing than a truly full and open competition with a larger pool of bidders. Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the restricted bidding environment.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from sustained support for its Defense Communications Agency (DCA) or related functions. Services likely involve critical communication infrastructure, network management, or technical support essential for military operations. The contract's duration suggests a stable, long-term operational requirement within the DoD. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles within JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION supporting the contract.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) contracts can incentivize cost overruns if performance metrics are not rigorously defined and monitored.
The 'Exclusion of Sources' justification requires scrutiny to ensure it was appropriate and did not unduly limit competition.
Long contract durations can sometimes lead to vendor lock-in and reduced flexibility for the agency to adopt newer technologies or services.

Positive Signals

The contract's longevity (nearly 8 years) indicates successful performance and a strong working relationship, meeting the agency's needs.
The presence of award fees suggests a mechanism to reward high performance, potentially leading to better service delivery.
The award was made to JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION, a specific entity, implying a focused selection process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader Information Technology and Defense sector, specifically related to communications infrastructure and support services. The market for such services is large and competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized solutions. The DoD is a major consumer of these services, often requiring high levels of security, reliability, and interoperability. Benchmarking this contract's value would require comparing it to similar long-term support agreements for critical communication systems within the federal government or large defense contractors.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the requirement was either too large, too specialized, or the competition strategy did not prioritize small business participation. Consequently, there are likely no direct subcontracting opportunities mandated for small businesses through this specific award, though the prime contractor might engage them independently.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Award Fee contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Army contracting officers and program managers. They are responsible for monitoring costs, ensuring performance meets award fee criteria, and auditing expenditures. Transparency is facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms, though specific details of award fee determinations are often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Communications Services
IT Support Services
Network Infrastructure Management
Federal IT Contracts
Department of Defense IT Spending

Risk Flags

Limited Competition Justification
Cost Plus Award Fee Structure
Long Contract Duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $18.0 million to JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-12-14. End: 2007-12-31.

What specific services fall under the 'DCA' designation for this contract, and what was the justification for excluding other sources?

The 'DCA' designation likely refers to services related to the Defense Communications Agency or similar communication and network infrastructure support within the Department of Defense. Without access to the contract details or agency justifications, the precise services remain unspecified. The 'Exclusion of Sources' clause indicates that the agency identified specific reasons for not pursuing a broader competition, such as unique capabilities possessed by JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION, prior successful performance on related tasks, or specific security requirements that limited the pool of eligible contractors. A thorough review would require examining the Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) documentation filed by the Department of the Army.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure compare to other contract types in terms of cost efficiency for the government?

Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) contracts reimburse the contractor for allowable costs plus a base fee, with an additional award fee contingent upon meeting or exceeding performance objectives. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPA can be less cost-efficient if not managed meticulously, as the government bears the cost risk and must ensure performance metrics are stringent and achievable. However, CPA can be advantageous for complex projects where the scope is not fully defined at the outset or where innovation and high performance are critical, as it incentivizes the contractor to go beyond minimum requirements. It offers more flexibility than fixed-price contracts but requires more active oversight than firm-fixed-price agreements to control costs and ensure value.

What is the track record of JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION with the Department of Defense and similar contracts?

JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION has held this specific contract with the Department of the Army for nearly 8 years, indicating a sustained relationship and likely satisfactory performance to warrant renewal or continued funding. To assess their broader track record, one would need to examine other contracts awarded to them by the DoD and other federal agencies. Key indicators include past performance evaluations, any history of contract disputes or terminations, and their experience with similar service types (e.g., IT, communications, defense support). A positive performance history on this substantial contract suggests competence, but a comprehensive review across all their federal engagements would provide a fuller picture.

Given the contract's duration and value, what are the potential risks associated with vendor lock-in and technological obsolescence?

The nearly 8-year duration of this contract presents a moderate risk of vendor lock-in and potential technological obsolescence. Vendor lock-in occurs when the agency becomes heavily reliant on a single contractor's proprietary systems, processes, or expertise, making it difficult and costly to switch providers. Technological obsolescence is a risk if the contractor's solutions are not regularly updated to incorporate advancements in the field. Mitigating these risks requires the Department of the Army to actively manage the contract, ensuring clear requirements for technology refresh, maintaining in-house expertise to understand the services, and periodically reassessing the market to ensure competitive options remain available.

How does the $18 million total award amount compare to annual spending on similar defense communication services?

The total award of approximately $18 million over nearly 8 years equates to an average annual value of roughly $2.3 million. This figure needs to be contextualized within the broader spending landscape of the Department of Defense for communication services. The DoD's overall IT and communications budget is in the tens of billions of dollars annually. Therefore, this specific contract, while substantial for the contractor, represents a relatively small portion of the DoD's total expenditure in this domain. Benchmarking requires comparing it to other contracts of similar scope, duration, and service type within the defense sector to ascertain if the pricing is competitive.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Address: 12625 HIGH BLUFF DR, SAN DIEGO, CA, 90

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline