DoD's $35.9M R&D contract to Odyssey Systems Consulting Group shows limited competition and fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,882,734 ($35.9M)

Contractor: Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-04-18

End Date: 2016-01-17

Contract Duration: 1,004 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF PASS INTERIM CONTRACT

Place of Performance

Location: WAKEFIELD, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01880

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $35.9 million to ODYSSEY SYSTEMS CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF PASS INTERIM CONTRACT Key points: 1. Contract awarded via sole-source justification, raising concerns about price discovery. 2. Performance period exceeded initial duration, potentially impacting cost control. 3. Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences sector. 4. Contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can incentivize cost overruns. 5. Geographic concentration in Massachusetts. 6. No small business set-aside, indicating potential missed opportunities for smaller firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $35.9 million for a 3-year period appears within a reasonable range for specialized R&D services. However, the lack of competitive bidding makes a precise value-for-money assessment difficult. Benchmarking against similar sole-source R&D contracts in the defense sector would be necessary for a more definitive conclusion. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, while common for R&D, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if not closely monitored.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor was solicited. This significantly limits competition and raises questions about whether the government obtained the best possible price and terms. Without a competitive process, it's challenging to ascertain if alternative solutions or more cost-effective approaches were overlooked. The justification for sole-source procurement would need to be robust to ensure taxpayer funds were used appropriately.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the absence of competition reduces pressure on the contractor to offer competitive pricing. This also limits opportunities for other qualified businesses to compete for government work.

Public Impact

Benefits the Department of Defense by funding critical research and development activities. Services delivered likely involve advanced scientific and engineering research. Geographic impact concentrated in Massachusetts, potentially supporting local high-tech workforce. Workforce implications include employment of specialized researchers and engineers.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potentially increases costs.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed effectively.
Lack of small business participation may limit access to innovative solutions from smaller firms.

Positive Signals

Contract supports critical R&D for the Department of Defense.
Long-term contract duration suggests a sustained need for the services provided.
Award to an established entity (Odyssey Systems Consulting Group) may indicate a track record of performance.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This is a critical area for defense innovation, requiring specialized expertise. The market for such services is often characterized by a mix of large defense contractors and specialized R&D firms. Spending in this category is substantial across the federal government, with significant portions allocated by the Department of Defense to maintain technological superiority.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the contractor, Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd., is not explicitly identified as a small business in the provided data. This suggests that opportunities for small business subcontracting may be limited, or that the prime contractor is expected to handle the majority of the work. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management offices. The Inspector General's office may conduct audits or investigations into the contract's performance and financial management, particularly given the CPFF structure. Transparency would depend on the level of detail made public regarding contract modifications, performance reviews, and cost reporting.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Research and Development Programs
Advanced Technology Development Contracts
Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contracts
Sole-Source Defense Procurements

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
Potential for cost overruns
Limited competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $35.9 million to ODYSSEY SYSTEMS CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.. IGF::CT::IGF PASS INTERIM CONTRACT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ODYSSEY SYSTEMS CONSULTING GROUP, LTD..

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 $35.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-04-18. End: 2016-01-17.

What is the track record of Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd. with the Department of Defense?

Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd. has a history of receiving contracts from the Department of Defense. While this specific contract is for $35.9 million, their broader portfolio with the DoD would need to be analyzed to fully assess their track record. Key indicators would include past performance ratings, any contract disputes or terminations, and the types of services they have previously provided. A review of their contract history could reveal patterns in cost performance, adherence to schedules, and overall client satisfaction, providing a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and capability in fulfilling defense requirements.

How does the value of this contract compare to similar R&D contracts awarded by the DoD?

Comparing this $35.9 million contract to similar R&D contracts requires access to a broader dataset of DoD procurements within the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' NAICS code. Factors such as contract duration, specific research areas, and the competitive landscape influence pricing. Given this was a sole-source award, it's difficult to benchmark against competitively bid contracts. However, if similar sole-source R&D efforts of comparable scope and duration exist, they could serve as a reference point. Without such comparative data, assessing whether this contract represents good value is challenging, though the CPFF structure inherently carries higher cost risk than fixed-price contracts.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for R&D?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, like the one awarded to Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd., revolve around cost control and contractor incentives. In a CPFF arrangement, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee. This structure can incentivize contractors to increase costs, as their fee remains constant regardless of the final project cost. This necessitates robust government oversight to monitor expenditures and ensure costs are reasonable and allocable. For R&D, where project scope and outcomes can be uncertain, CPFF can be appropriate, but it requires diligent management to mitigate the risk of cost overruns and ensure the fixed fee remains a fair incentive for efficient performance.

What is the significance of this contract being awarded on a sole-source basis?

The sole-source award signifies that the Department of the Air Force determined that only Odyssey Systems Consulting Group, Ltd. could meet the specific requirements of this research and development effort. This is typically justified under circumstances where there is a lack of competition, such as when a unique capability or proprietary technology is required, or in urgent situations. However, sole-source awards bypass the competitive bidding process, which is designed to ensure the government receives the best value through price and performance competition. Consequently, sole-source contracts can potentially be more expensive for taxpayers and may limit opportunities for other qualified vendors. The justification for this sole-source award would need to be thoroughly reviewed to ensure it was appropriate and that the government negotiated the best possible terms.

How has federal spending in the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' sector evolved over time?

Federal spending in the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' sector (NAICS 541712) has historically been a significant component of the federal budget, particularly driven by defense and health agencies. While specific year-over-year trends fluctuate based on national priorities, economic conditions, and geopolitical factors, there has been a general upward trajectory in R&D investment over the past decades. Agencies like the Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, and National Institutes of Health are major contributors. This contract, valued at approximately $35.9 million, represents a small fraction of the overall federal R&D spending in this broad category, which can amount to tens of billions annually across all agencies.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)

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

Address: 201 EDGEWATER DR STE 270, WAKEFIELD, MA, 01880

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $45,270,172

Exercised Options: $45,090,797

Current Obligation: $35,882,734

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline