Air Force IT support contract awarded to RCF Information Systems for over $26.4M, utilizing a non-competitive process

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,402,078 ($26.4M)

Contractor: RCF Information Systems, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2017-05-25

End Date: 2018-11-30

Contract Duration: 554 days

Daily Burn Rate: $47.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF, NON-ACAT, AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES BRIDGE

Place of Performance

Location: BEAVERCREEK TOWNSHIP, GREENE County, OHIO, 45431

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.4 million to RCF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF, NON-ACAT, AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES BRIDGE Key points: 1. The contract's value of over $26.4 million for IT support services represents a significant investment by the Air Force. 2. Awarded as a sole-source contract, the lack of competition raises questions about potential price efficiencies and market responsiveness. 3. The contract duration of 554 days (approximately 1.5 years) suggests a need for ongoing, specialized IT services. 4. The 'Computer Facilities Management Services' NAICS code indicates a focus on maintaining and managing IT infrastructure. 5. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to provide cost certainty for the government, shifting cost risk to the contractor. 6. The contract was awarded to RCF Information Systems, Inc., a single vendor, highlighting a potential lack of broader market engagement.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $26.4 million contract is challenging without detailed service scope and performance metrics. However, the sole-source nature of the award, coupled with the absence of a competitive bidding process, suggests that the government may not have achieved the most favorable pricing. Comparing this to similar IT support services contracts, especially those competed openly, would likely reveal a higher cost per unit or overall price for this engagement. The firm-fixed-price structure offers some cost predictability, but the lack of competition limits the ability to assess if the price reflects true market value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a sole-source justification, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. The 'NOT COMPETED' status indicates that only one vendor, RCF Information Systems, Inc., was solicited or considered for this requirement. This approach is typically used when a specific vendor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or when urgent and compelling circumstances prevent a competitive procurement. The lack of competition means that price discovery through market forces was bypassed, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple bids had been received.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these IT support services due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without competing offers, there is less assurance that the price negotiated reflects the best possible value for the government's investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force, which receives essential IT support services to maintain its operational capabilities. The services delivered likely include the management, maintenance, and support of computer facilities and related IT infrastructure. The geographic impact is centered in Ohio (ST: OH), where the contract was administered, potentially supporting local Air Force installations. The contract supports the IT workforce within RCF Information Systems, Inc., and indirectly, the government personnel who rely on these IT services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
  • Lack of transparency in the procurement process due to non-competitive nature.
  • Potential for vendor lock-in if RCF Information Systems, Inc. has unique capabilities.
  • Limited opportunity to assess contractor performance against market benchmarks due to single-source award.

Positive Signals

  • Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
  • Contract awarded to a specific vendor, potentially indicating specialized expertise required by the Air Force.
  • The contract addresses a clear need for ongoing IT support services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) sector, specifically focusing on IT support and facilities management. The market for IT services to government agencies is substantial, with significant spending allocated to maintaining and upgrading complex federal IT infrastructures. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar IT support services, particularly those awarded to manage large-scale computer facilities. The Air Force Research Laboratory's need for these services highlights the critical role of specialized IT support in enabling advanced research and development activities.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb: false'. Furthermore, the contractor, RCF Information Systems, Inc., is not explicitly identified as a small business in the provided data. This suggests that the primary award was not directed towards small business participation. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans, so the impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear, but it is unlikely to have a direct positive impact through this specific prime contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or reported concerning the contract's execution or award.

Related Government Programs

  • Air Force IT Services Contracts
  • Information Technology Support Services
  • Federal IT Infrastructure Management
  • Sole-Source IT Procurements
  • Department of Defense IT Spending

Risk Flags

  • Sole-source award
  • Lack of competition
  • Potential for overpricing
  • Limited transparency in procurement

Tags

it-support, computer-facilities-management, air-force, department-of-defense, sole-source, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, ohio, rcf-information-systems-inc, information-technology, non-competed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.4 million to RCF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF, NON-ACAT, AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES BRIDGE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RCF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-05-25. End: 2018-11-30.

What specific IT services were provided under this contract?

The contract, identified by NAICS code 541513 (Computer Facilities Management Services), indicates that the services provided likely encompassed the management, maintenance, and support of computer facilities. This could include tasks such as hardware and software installation, network administration, system monitoring, troubleshooting, data backup and recovery, and ensuring the operational readiness of the Air Force's IT infrastructure. The 'Information Technology Support Services Bridge' in the description suggests it may have served as a temporary solution to ensure continuity of essential IT services while a more permanent or competitive solution was being sought or finalized.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of being competed?

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' signifying a sole-source award. While the specific justification is not detailed, common reasons for sole-source awards include: 1) Urgent and compelling circumstances where delaying the award to conduct full and open competition would cause serious injury to the government. 2) The requirement for a unique product or service available only from a single responsible source. 3) Situations where only one source is capable of satisfying the requirement. For this 'bridge' contract, it's plausible that it was intended to maintain critical IT services without interruption while a longer-term, potentially competitive, contract was being developed or finalized, thus preventing a gap in essential support.

How does the $26.4 million contract value compare to similar IT support services contracts?

Direct comparison of the $26.4 million value is difficult without knowing the precise scope, duration, and service levels. However, for a contract spanning approximately 1.5 years (554 days), this represents a substantial investment. If this contract was indeed a 'bridge' to maintain existing services, its cost might be higher than a competitively bid contract for similar services, as competition typically drives down prices. Benchmarking against other sole-source IT support contracts of similar duration and complexity would be necessary for a more accurate assessment, but generally, competitive procurements yield better value for the government.

What is the track record of RCF Information Systems, Inc. with the federal government?

The provided data indicates RCF Information Systems, Inc. was awarded this specific $26.4 million contract. To assess their broader track record, one would need to examine other federal contracts awarded to this company. This would involve searching federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) for past performance, contract types, agencies served, and overall dollar value of awards. A review of past performance would help determine if they have a history of successful contract execution, compliance, and client satisfaction within the federal space, which is crucial for evaluating reliability.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source IT support contract?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source IT support contract is the potential for inflated costs due to the lack of competition. Without competing bids, the government may not be securing the best possible price or value. Another risk is vendor lock-in, where the government becomes overly reliant on a single provider, making it difficult or costly to switch vendors in the future. Furthermore, a sole-source award can sometimes indicate a lack of market research or planning, potentially leading to suboptimal solutions or missed opportunities for innovation that a competitive process might uncover.

How does the firm-fixed-price contract type affect cost management and risk?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally preferred by the government for services where the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly. Under an FFP contract, the contractor agrees to a total price for the specified work, and this price remains constant regardless of the contractor's actual costs. This shifts the cost risk entirely to the contractor, providing the government with cost certainty. If the contractor can perform the work more efficiently than anticipated, they realize a higher profit margin. Conversely, if costs exceed estimates, the contractor absorbs the loss. This structure incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesComputer Systems Design and Related ServicesComputer Facilities Management Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONSADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4200 COLONEL GLENN HWY STE 100, DAYTON, OH, 45431

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $31,167,113

Exercised Options: $26,402,078

Current Obligation: $26,402,078

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2017-05-25

Current End Date: 2018-11-30

Potential End Date: 2018-11-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2018-10-22

More Contracts from RCF Information Systems, Inc.

View all RCF Information Systems, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending