DOJ's $26M IT services contract awarded to Rolling Bay, LLC, lacked competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,069,699 ($26.1M)

Contractor: Rolling BAY, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2013-12-17

End Date: 2015-06-30

Contract Duration: 560 days

Daily Burn Rate: $46.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF FOR CRITICAL FUNCTIONS

Place of Performance

Location: MARTINSBURG, BERKELEY County, WEST VIRGINIA, 25401

State: West Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $26.1 million to ROLLING BAY, LLC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF FOR CRITICAL FUNCTIONS Key points: 1. The contract for computing infrastructure and data processing services was awarded on a sole-source basis. 2. Pricing and value for money are difficult to assess due to the lack of competitive bidding. 3. The contract duration of 560 days suggests a need for ongoing services. 4. The award was made under simplified acquisition procedures, potentially limiting oversight. 5. The contractor, Rolling Bay, LLC, received a significant award for IT infrastructure support. 6. The geographic location of the contractor is West Virginia.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Without a competitive bidding process, it is challenging to benchmark the value for money or assess the fairness of the pricing for this $26 million contract. The lack of comparison to other offers makes it difficult to determine if the government received optimal pricing. The fixed-price nature of the contract shifts some risk to the contractor, but the absence of competition prevents a robust assessment of whether the price reflects market rates for computing infrastructure and data processing services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed under simplified acquisition procedures, indicating a sole-source award. The absence of multiple bidders means there was no opportunity for price discovery through competition. This approach bypasses the standard process of soliciting bids from various vendors, which typically leads to better pricing and a wider range of solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the lack of competitive pressure to drive down costs. The absence of competition also limits the government's ability to explore potentially more innovative or cost-effective solutions from a broader market.

Public Impact

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is the primary beneficiary, receiving essential IT infrastructure and data processing services. These services are critical for the operational functions of the ATF, supporting their mission. The contract's impact is primarily within the federal government's IT infrastructure, with no direct public-facing services specified. Workforce implications are likely internal to the contractor and the ATF's IT department.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and suboptimal service.
Sole-source awards can stifle innovation by not exposing the agency to a wider range of technological solutions.
The use of simplified acquisition procedures for a contract of this size may indicate a deviation from best practices for large procurements.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded to a single entity, potentially ensuring continuity of service.
The firm fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government, assuming the price was fair.
The services provided are essential for the agency's IT infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT services sector, specifically focusing on computing infrastructure, data processing, and web hosting. The market for these services is highly competitive, with numerous providers ranging from large cloud service providers to specialized IT firms. Benchmarking this contract's value is difficult without competitive data, but the general market trend is towards increasing efficiency and cost reduction through cloud adoption and managed services.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. The sole-source nature of the award further suggests that opportunities for small businesses to participate as prime contractors or subcontractors were likely limited in this specific procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. However, as a sole-source award under simplified acquisition procedures, the level of scrutiny might be less than for a fully competed, large-scale contract. Transparency is limited due to the lack of public bidding information. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically apply to all federal contracts, but specific oversight activities are unknown.

Related Government Programs

Federal IT Infrastructure Services
Data Center Operations
Cloud Computing Services
IT Managed Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award without clear justification.
Potential lack of competitive pricing.
Award under SAP for a large dollar value contract.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $26.1 million to ROLLING BAY, LLC. IGF::CT::IGF FOR CRITICAL FUNCTIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ROLLING BAY, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Acquisition and Property Management Division).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-12-17. End: 2015-06-30.

What is the track record of Rolling Bay, LLC in providing IT services to the federal government?

The provided data indicates Rolling Bay, LLC was awarded this specific contract for IT services. Further details regarding their past performance, other federal contracts, client satisfaction, and experience in delivering similar services are not available in this dataset. A comprehensive assessment of their track record would require accessing broader federal procurement databases and performance reviews to understand their history, reliability, and expertise in fulfilling government requirements beyond this single award.

How does the awarded amount of $26 million compare to similar IT infrastructure contracts?

Without competitive bidding data for this specific contract, a direct comparison of the $26 million award to similar contracts is challenging. The market for IT infrastructure services is vast and varied, with pricing dependent on scope, duration, service level agreements, and the specific technologies employed. Generally, contracts of this magnitude for computing infrastructure and data processing can range significantly. To provide a meaningful benchmark, one would need to identify comparable contracts awarded through full and open competition, considering factors like the number of users supported, data storage requirements, uptime guarantees, and the specific services rendered (e.g., managed hosting vs. raw compute).

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source IT services contract of this size?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source IT services contract of this size include potential overpayment due to the absence of competitive pricing, limited access to innovative solutions that might be offered by other vendors, and a reduced incentive for the contractor to maintain optimal performance or efficiency if competition is absent. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, making it difficult and costly to switch providers later. Furthermore, the lack of transparency inherent in sole-source awards can obscure potential conflicts of interest or inefficiencies, making robust oversight crucial.

How effective are computing infrastructure providers, data processing, and web hosting services in supporting federal agency missions?

These services are fundamental to the operational effectiveness of virtually all federal agencies in the modern era. Reliable computing infrastructure ensures that systems are available and performant, data processing enables the analysis and management of vast amounts of information critical for decision-making and operations, and web hosting supports public-facing portals, internal applications, and data dissemination. When procured effectively, these services enhance an agency's ability to execute its mission, improve citizen services, and maintain secure operations. Conversely, poorly managed or inadequate services can lead to system failures, data breaches, operational disruptions, and hinder mission accomplishment.

What are the historical spending patterns for computing infrastructure providers, data processing, and web hosting services within the Department of Justice?

Historical spending patterns for computing infrastructure, data processing, and web hosting services within the Department of Justice (DOJ) would likely show a consistent and significant investment in these areas, reflecting the agency's extensive data management and operational needs. Over the years, there has been a general trend across federal agencies, including the DOJ, towards modernization, cloud migration, and increased reliance on outsourced IT services. Analyzing past spending would reveal the evolution of technology adoption, the scale of IT investments, and potentially shifts in procurement strategies, such as moving from on-premise solutions to cloud-based services or increasing the use of managed service providers.

What is the significance of the contract being awarded under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP)?

The significance of this contract being awarded under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP) is that it allowed for a less formal and potentially faster procurement process compared to full and open competition for larger contracts. SAP is generally intended for purchases not exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold (which can vary but is often around $250,000, though higher thresholds exist for certain circumstances). For a contract valued at $26 million, its award under SAP is unusual and warrants further investigation into the justification for using these procedures. It typically implies less stringent documentation, fewer required bidders, and potentially less robust oversight, which can be a risk factor for larger dollar amounts.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services › Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

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: 10440 BALLS FORD RD STE 200, MANASSAS, VA, 10

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Government, Native American Tribal Government, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,069,699

Exercised Options: $26,069,699

Current Obligation: $26,069,699

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DJA11ICO0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline