DOJ Litigation Support Contract Exceeds $70M, Awarded via Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $70,292,563 ($70.3M)

Contractor: PAE Labat-Anderson LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2013-10-10

End Date: 2021-05-31

Contract Duration: 2,790 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF THIS CONTRACT WILL BE USED TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LITIGATION SUPPORT PRODUCTS AND SERVICES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES ON AN INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY TASK ORDER BASIS. INDIVIDUAL TASK ORDERS ISSUED UNDER THIS CONTRACT MAY SUPPORT ANY DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ORGANIZATION OR FEDERAL AGENCY ON A LOCAL AND/OR NATIONWIDE BASIS. SERVICES MAY BE REQUIRED ANYWHERE IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES AND ITS TERRITORIES. THIS CONTRACT WILL ALSO BE USED TO SUPPORT CASE- OR INVESTIGATION-RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS

Place of Performance

Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22101

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $70.3 million to PAE LABAT-ANDERSON LLC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF THIS CONTRACT WILL BE USED TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LITIGATION SUPPORT PRODUCTS AND SERVICES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES ON AN INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY TASK ORDER BASIS. INDIVIDUAL TASK ORDERS ISSUED UNDER THIS CONTRACT MAY … Key points: 1. Significant contract value of over $70 million for litigation support services. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. Services are broad, supporting the Department of Justice and other federal agencies nationwide and potentially internationally. 4. Contract duration spans nearly 8 years, from October 2013 to May 2021.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value is substantial, but specific pricing details per task order are not provided. Without granular data on individual task orders, it's difficult to assess if the pricing is competitive against similar litigation support services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust process for soliciting bids and ensuring fair market pricing. This method generally leads to better price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition aims to secure the best value for taxpayers by encouraging multiple bidders and potentially lower prices.

Public Impact

Ensures critical legal and administrative support for federal agencies, aiding in justice system operations. Supports a wide range of legal needs, from case preparation to administrative functions. Potential for international support indicates broad applicability and reach of services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific per-task order pricing makes value assessment difficult.
Broad scope could lead to unforeseen cost escalations if not managed tightly.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition.
Long-term contract provides stable support for agency needs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under professional services, specifically legal support. The value is significant for this sector, and the broad applicability across federal agencies highlights the demand for such specialized services.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Awarded via full and open competition suggests a structured procurement process. However, ongoing oversight of task order execution and cost control is crucial for ensuring continued value.

Related Government Programs

All Other Legal Services
Department of Justice Contracting
Offices, Boards and Divisions Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of detailed cost breakdown per task order.
Potential for scope creep given the broad service description.
Long contract duration without clear performance metrics provided.
International service provision adds complexity and potential cost variability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $70.3 million to PAE LABAT-ANDERSON LLC. IGF::CT::IGF THIS CONTRACT WILL BE USED TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LITIGATION SUPPORT PRODUCTS AND SERVICES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES ON AN INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY TASK ORDER BASIS. INDIVIDUAL TASK ORDERS ISSUED UNDER THIS CONTRACT MAY SUPPORT ANY DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ORGANIZATION OR FEDERAL AGENCY ON A LOCAL AND/OR NATIONWIDE BASIS. SERVICES MAY BE REQUIRED ANYWHERE IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES AND ITS TERRITORIES. THIS CONTRACT WILL ALSO BE US

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PAE LABAT-ANDERSON LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Offices, Boards and Divisions).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $70.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-10-10. End: 2021-05-31.

What was the average cost per task order, and how does it compare to market rates for similar litigation support services?

The average cost per task order cannot be determined from the provided data, as only the total contract value is available. A comprehensive analysis would require access to individual task order details, including scope of work, hours, and rates. Benchmarking against market rates would then be possible to assess cost-effectiveness and identify potential overpricing or savings.

What specific types of litigation support were most frequently procured under this contract, and were there any cost overruns associated with them?

The data does not specify the breakdown of litigation support services procured. Identifying the most frequent service types and any associated cost overruns would necessitate a review of individual task orders and performance reports. This level of detail is crucial for understanding where the majority of funds were allocated and if costs remained within projections.

How effectively did the full and open competition process ensure competitive pricing and optimal service delivery for the Department of Justice?

The full and open competition process theoretically ensures competitive pricing by allowing multiple vendors to bid. However, the effectiveness in this specific case depends on the number of bids received, the quality of proposals, and the final negotiated prices. Without comparative data on bids or post-award performance metrics, it's challenging to definitively assess the optimal service delivery and cost savings achieved.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Legal Services › All Other Legal Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Altegrity, Inc.

Address: 7799 LEESBURG PIKE STE 300N, FALLS CHURCH, VA, 22043

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $70,292,563

Exercised Options: $70,292,563

Current Obligation: $70,292,563

Actual Outlays: $24,168,531

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DJJ13C2442

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline