DoD's $26.9M JPRA Support Contract Awarded to TATE, Inc. Lacks Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,875,613 ($26.9M)

Contractor: Tate, Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2017-03-31

End Date: 2019-04-30

Contract Duration: 760 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF ACAT III BIG SAFARI TATE JPRA SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22203

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.9 million to TATE, INCORPORATED for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF ACAT III BIG SAFARI TATE JPRA SUPPORT Key points: 1. Significant contract value of $26.9 million for professional, scientific, and technical services. 2. Sole-source award to TATE, Incorporated raises concerns about competitive pricing. 3. Lack of competition and fixed-fee structure may limit cost-saving opportunities. 4. Services fall under 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, combined with a lack of competition, makes it difficult to assess pricing effectiveness. Benchmarking against similar contracts is challenging without competitive data.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, indicating no competitive bidding process. This significantly limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition suggests that taxpayers may not have received the best possible price for these services.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be overpaying due to the lack of competitive bidding. Limited transparency in pricing due to sole-source award. Potential for reduced innovation and service quality without competitive pressure.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Cost-plus contract type

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a single vendor

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the broad 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' category. Spending in this sector can vary widely, but competitive procurement is generally encouraged to ensure value.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this sole-source award, suggesting a missed opportunity for small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this award warrants further oversight to ensure the government received fair value and that the justification for not competing was sound.

Related Government Programs

All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Air Force Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition.
Cost-plus contract type can lead to cost overruns.
Lack of transparency in pricing.
Potential for reduced contractor efficiency due to lack of competition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.9 million to TATE, INCORPORATED. IGF::CT::IGF ACAT III BIG SAFARI TATE JPRA SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TATE, INCORPORATED.

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 $26.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-03-31. End: 2019-04-30.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data does not include the specific justification for the sole-source award. Typically, such justifications would involve reasons like unique capabilities of the vendor, urgent needs, or lack of other responsible sources. Further investigation would be required to ascertain the exact rationale behind this decision.

How does the fixed fee component of this CPFF contract compare to industry standards for similar services?

Without specific details on the fixed fee percentage and the scope of work, a direct comparison to industry standards is difficult. CPFF contracts are generally used when costs are uncertain. The fixed fee is intended to incentivize the contractor, but its reasonableness in this sole-source context is questionable without competitive benchmarks.

What mechanisms are in place to ensure the quality and effectiveness of services provided under this sole-source contract?

While the contract type doesn't inherently guarantee quality, oversight mechanisms such as performance metrics, regular reviews, and acceptance criteria within the contract should be in place. The government contracting officer is responsible for monitoring contractor performance and ensuring deliverables meet requirements.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Amentum Services, Inc.

Address: 1800 DIAGONAL RD STE 520, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22314

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $41,503,758

Exercised Options: $28,454,004

Current Obligation: $26,875,613

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA862015G4022

IDV Type: BOA

Timeline