DoD's $114.5M IT Services Contract Awarded to Titan Corporation Shows Mixed Value and Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,961,106 ($13.0M)

Contractor: Engility LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-03-30

End Date: 2009-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,827 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (APPLIES TO AWARDS WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE ABOVE APPLY)

Sector: IT

Official Description: 200406!000183!5700!GG01 !38 LS/LGC !GS35F5396H !C!N! !N!FA877304F0086! !20040330!20050331!114568400!114568400!048341838!N!TITAN CORPORATION !11955 FREEDOM DRIVE, SUITE!RESTON !VA!20190!73800!017!40!TINKER AFB !CANADIAN !OKLAHOMA !+000001987076!N!N!000000000000!R799!OTHER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541519!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B!F!Y! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !C!N! ! ! ! ! ! ! !00 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73145

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.0 million to ENGILITY LLC for work described as: 200406!000183!5700!GG01 !38 LS/LGC !GS35F5396H !C!N! !N!FA877304F0086! !20040330!20050331!114568400!114568400!048341838!N!TITAN CORPORATION !11955 FREEDOM DRIVE, SUITE!RESTON !VA!20190!73800!017!40!TINKER AFB !CANA… Key points: 1. The contract's value proposition appears fair, with a per-unit cost that is difficult to benchmark due to limited public data. 2. Competition dynamics were favorable, with a full and open process indicating potential for competitive pricing. 3. Risk indicators are low, with no apparent performance issues or significant deviations from the contract's scope. 4. The contract's performance context is within the broader IT services sector, supporting essential Air Force operations. 5. Titan Corporation's positioning in this contract is as a service provider for IT and management support. 6. The contract duration of over five years suggests a stable, long-term need for these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $114.5 million over approximately five years suggests a significant investment in IT services. Benchmarking the value is challenging without more granular data on the specific services rendered and their unit costs. However, the absence of reported issues or significant cost overruns implies a degree of value realization. Compared to similar large-scale IT service contracts, the pricing appears within a reasonable range, though a definitive assessment requires deeper analysis of the service components.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The specific number of bidders is not detailed in the provided data, but the nature of the competition implies a robust bidding process. This level of competition is generally expected to drive more competitive pricing and encourage vendors to offer their best value propositions to secure the award.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at a more competitive price, potentially saving government funds. It also promotes a more efficient allocation of resources by allowing the most capable and cost-effective providers to win contracts.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of the Air Force and its personnel, who receive essential IT and management support services. Services delivered include IT support, management support, and potentially other related computer services, crucial for operational efficiency. The geographic impact is centered around Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma, indicating a direct local economic and operational influence. Workforce implications include the employment of individuals by Titan Corporation to fulfill the contract requirements, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the IT and support services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited public data makes it difficult to fully assess the value for money and compare per-unit costs.
The specific nature of 'Other Management Support Services' is broad and could encompass a wide range of activities, requiring further clarification.
The contract was awarded in 2004, and current market rates for similar services may have evolved significantly since then.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process that likely resulted in favorable pricing.
The contract was awarded to Titan Corporation, a known entity in the defense contracting space.
The contract duration of over five years indicates a stable and ongoing requirement for these services by the Air Force.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology and Professional Services sector, a critical area for modern defense operations. The IT services market is highly competitive and dynamic, with significant government spending allocated to maintaining and upgrading technological infrastructure. This contract represents a portion of the Department of Defense's broader IT spending, supporting its mission-critical functions. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large IT service contracts awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies for similar scope and duration.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. Therefore, it is unlikely that small businesses were specifically targeted for this award. There is no information available regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem. Without explicit set-aside goals or subcontracting requirements, the direct impact on small businesses is presumed to be minimal, unless they were prime contractors in a joint venture or subcontractors to Titan Corporation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures are inherent in the contract terms, including performance standards and delivery schedules. Transparency is facilitated through federal contract databases like FPDS, where award details are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

IT Services Contracts
Professional Services Contracts
Department of Defense IT Modernization Programs
Air Force Logistics and Support Services
Management Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Limited public detail on specific services rendered.
Difficulty in benchmarking per-unit costs due to data constraints.
Contract awarded in 2004; market conditions and technology have evolved since.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.0 million to ENGILITY LLC. 200406!000183!5700!GG01 !38 LS/LGC !GS35F5396H !C!N! !N!FA877304F0086! !20040330!20050331!114568400!114568400!048341838!N!TITAN CORPORATION !11955 FREEDOM DRIVE, SUITE!RESTON !VA!20190!73800!017!40!TINKER AFB !CANADIAN !OKLAHOMA !+000001987076!N!N!000000000000!R799!OTHER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541519!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENGILITY LLC.

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 $13.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-03-30. End: 2009-03-31.

What was Titan Corporation's track record with the federal government prior to this award?

Prior to this specific award in 2004, Titan Corporation (which later became part of Engility LLC) had a history of federal contracting. While the provided data doesn't detail their entire pre-2004 federal award history, companies of this nature typically engage in numerous contracts across various agencies, often in defense, IT, and professional services. Their track record would generally be assessed based on past performance evaluations, including on-time delivery, quality of services, and adherence to contract terms on previous engagements. A comprehensive review would involve examining their performance on prior contracts, any past disputes or terminations, and their overall reputation within the federal contracting community.

How does the $114.5 million award compare to similar IT service contracts awarded by the DoD around 2004?

The $114.5 million award for IT and management support services to Tinker AFB is a substantial contract, indicative of significant operational needs. Around 2004, the Department of Defense was heavily investing in IT modernization and support. Large-scale IT service contracts often ranged from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the scope, duration, and complexity. This particular contract's value appears consistent with other major IT support awards for base operations or specific system support. However, a precise comparison would require analyzing contracts with similar North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes (like 541519), similar agencies (DoD branches), and similar contract types (e.g., IDIQ, task orders) awarded within the same timeframe to establish a clear benchmark for value and scale.

What were the primary risks associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?

Primary risks associated with a large IT and management support contract like this often include performance risk (failure to deliver services as specified), schedule risk (delays in service provision), cost risk (overruns beyond the awarded amount, though less likely with fixed-price elements), and technical risk (integration issues or obsolescence). For this contract, awarded under full and open competition, mitigation strategies would likely have included robust performance metrics, clear service level agreements (SLAs), regular progress reviews, and potentially penalties for non-performance. The contractor's past performance would also have been a key factor in risk assessment. The absence of reported issues suggests that these mitigation strategies were effective throughout the contract's life.

How effective was the 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for taxpayers on this contract?

A 'full and open competition' is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayers, as it theoretically allows the widest possible pool of vendors to compete, driving down prices and encouraging innovation. For this $114.5 million contract, the competitive process likely led to a more favorable price than a sole-source award. However, the ultimate value realized depends on the specific requirements, the number of qualified bidders, and the effectiveness of the evaluation criteria. Without knowing the number of bids received or the details of the evaluation, it's difficult to definitively quantify the value achieved. Nonetheless, the competitive nature of the award is a positive indicator for taxpayer value.

What is the significance of the NAICS code 541519 ('Other Computer Related Services') in understanding the contract's scope?

The NAICS code 541519, 'Other Computer Related Services,' indicates that the contract's scope extends beyond standard IT support, such as network administration or hardware maintenance. This code encompasses a broad range of computer-related services not classified elsewhere, potentially including IT consulting, systems integration, data processing services, disaster recovery planning, and custom software development support. For this contract, it suggests that Titan Corporation was providing specialized or a combination of computer services that didn't fit neatly into more specific categories. Understanding this code is crucial for accurately assessing the contract's objectives, the required expertise, and comparing it to other federal procurements in the IT services domain.

How did the contract's duration of 1827 days (approx. 5 years) impact its overall value and risk profile?

A contract duration of approximately five years (1827 days) for a $114.5 million award suggests a long-term, stable requirement for the services provided. This extended period allows for greater efficiency and continuity, as the contractor can invest in personnel and processes without the constant uncertainty of short-term renewals. For taxpayers, a longer duration can sometimes lead to better pricing through economies of scale and reduced administrative costs associated with frequent re-competition. However, it also increases the risk of the contract becoming outdated if technology or requirements change significantly, or if the contractor's performance degrades over time. Effective contract management and performance monitoring are crucial to mitigate these risks over such an extended period.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Other Computer Related Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (APPLIES TO AWARDS WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE ABOVE APPLY) (2)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 008898843)

Address: 11955 FREEDOM DR 10TH FL, RESTON, VA, 20190

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS35F5396H

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline