GSA awards $627M IT support contract to Science Applications International Corporation for USCENTCOM

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $627,008,057 ($627.0M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2017-06-21

End Date: 2024-04-30

Contract Duration: 2,505 days

Daily Burn Rate: $250.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF TO GSQ0017AJ0001 IS AWARDED TO SUPPORT USCENTCOM SUPPORT THE J6 DIRECTORATE (CCJ6) ENTERPRISE IT PROGRAMS AND ASSETS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS.

Place of Performance

Location: TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH County, FLORIDA, 33621

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $627.0 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF TO GSQ0017AJ0001 IS AWARDED TO SUPPORT USCENTCOM SUPPORT THE J6 DIRECTORATE (CCJ6) ENTERPRISE IT PROGRAMS AND ASSETS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS. Key points: 1. Contract provides essential IT support for USCENTCOM's J6 Directorate. 2. Long-term contract duration (2505 days) suggests a need for sustained services. 3. Awarded via full and open competition, indicating a broad market search. 4. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 5. The geographic scope is primarily Florida, with potential for broader operational impact. 6. This award represents a significant investment in defense IT infrastructure.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total contract value of $627 million over approximately 7 years represents a substantial investment in IT support services. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale IT support contracts for defense agencies is crucial for a precise value-for-money assessment. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for performance-based incentives, which can drive efficiency, but also necessitates robust oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and aligned with achieved performance metrics. Without specific comparable contract data, a definitive value assessment is challenging, but the scale suggests a competitive bidding process likely yielded a fair market price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. The presence of 4 bids (as indicated by 'no': 4) suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant IT support requirement. A competitive environment generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more innovative solutions as contractors vie for the award. The agency's decision to use full and open competition indicates confidence that the market could meet the complex IT needs of USCENTCOM.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best value for their investment. Full and open competition increases the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and high-quality services, minimizing the risk of overpayment or substandard performance.

Public Impact

USCENTCOM's J6 Directorate receives critical IT infrastructure and enterprise support. Ensures the operational readiness and effectiveness of IT systems supporting military operations in the Central Command area. The primary beneficiaries are military personnel and civilian staff relying on robust IT services. Workforce implications include potential for IT professionals in Florida and surrounding areas supporting the contract. Geographic impact is centered in Florida, but the services directly support global military operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Award Fee contracts require diligent oversight to ensure costs are controlled and award fees are justified by performance.
The long duration of the contract could lead to scope creep or evolving technological needs that may not be fully addressed without contract modifications.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical IT functions can create vendor lock-in and potential risks if the contractor's performance degrades.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing.
The contract structure incentivizes performance through award fees, encouraging the contractor to exceed expectations.
The scale of the contract suggests a significant need and commitment from the agency, implying a well-defined requirement.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) services sector, specifically focusing on computer systems design and related services. The IT services market is vast and highly competitive, with significant government spending dedicated to supporting defense and intelligence operations. Contracts of this magnitude are typical for major defense commands requiring comprehensive IT support. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large IT support contracts awarded to prime contractors supporting Department of Defense entities, particularly those focused on command and control or enterprise IT infrastructure.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit indication of small business subcontracting goals in the provided data. The prime contractor, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), is a large business. While large contracts often include subcontracting plans, the absence of specific details here means the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear. It is possible that SAIC will engage small businesses as subcontractors, but this would need to be verified through contract documentation or reporting.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) through its Federal Acquisition Service. Oversight mechanisms would typically include regular performance reviews, financial audits, and adherence to the terms of the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, which includes performance metrics and award fee evaluations. Transparency is generally maintained through federal procurement databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

USCENTCOM IT Support Services
Defense Information Technology Contracting
GSA IT Schedule Contracts
Computer Systems Design Services
Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may lead to technology obsolescence.
Cost Plus Award Fee requires diligent performance monitoring.
Potential for vendor lock-in due to long-term commitment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $627.0 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. IGF::OT::IGF TO GSQ0017AJ0001 IS AWARDED TO SUPPORT USCENTCOM SUPPORT THE J6 DIRECTORATE (CCJ6) ENTERPRISE IT PROGRAMS AND ASSETS AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $627.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-06-21. End: 2024-04-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for IT support services by USCENTCOM's J6 Directorate prior to this award?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for USCENTCOM's J6 Directorate's IT support services prior to this $627 million award is crucial for understanding the scale and evolution of their IT needs. Without direct access to historical contract data for this specific directorate, we can infer trends from broader Department of Defense IT spending. Defense agencies consistently allocate significant portions of their budgets to IT modernization, maintenance, and support. Contracts for enterprise IT programs and assets are typically long-term due to the complexity and critical nature of these systems. A review of past GSA Federal Acquisition Service awards or specific USCENTCOM solicitations would reveal if previous contracts were sole-source, competed, and their approximate values, providing context for the current award's size and scope. This would help determine if this award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment in IT support.

How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Award Fee) compare to other IT support contracts of similar scope and duration?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) pricing structure is common for complex IT support services where performance outcomes are critical and can be objectively measured. Compared to other IT support contracts, CPAF offers a balance: the government pays the contractor's allowable costs plus a base fee, and then an additional award fee based on achieving specific performance targets. This differs from Fixed-Price contracts, which offer more cost certainty but less flexibility for evolving requirements, or Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), which adjusts the fee based on cost targets. For large-scale, long-duration IT support contracts like this one for USCENTCOM, CPAF is often preferred because it incentivizes the contractor to deliver high-quality services and meet demanding performance standards essential for military operations. The key is robust performance metrics and diligent oversight to ensure the award fees are truly earned and represent good value for the taxpayer.

What are the specific performance metrics and award fee criteria used in this contract?

The provided data does not detail the specific performance metrics or award fee criteria for this contract. However, for a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract of this nature, supporting a military command's enterprise IT programs and assets, typical performance metrics would likely include areas such as system uptime and availability, response times for IT support requests, successful implementation of system upgrades and patches, cybersecurity compliance, project completion rates for IT initiatives, and overall user satisfaction. The award fee structure would be designed to reward the contractor for exceeding baseline performance levels in these critical areas. Without the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the contract's award fee plan, a precise evaluation of these criteria is not possible, but they are fundamental to assessing the contractor's performance and the value delivered.

What is the track record of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) in delivering similar IT support services to the Department of Defense?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has a substantial track record of delivering IT support and systems integration services to the Department of Defense (DoD) and other federal agencies. They are a major defense contractor with extensive experience in areas such as C4ISR systems, enterprise IT infrastructure, cybersecurity, and cloud computing. SAIC has held numerous large-scale contracts supporting various military branches and combatant commands, often involving complex system design, integration, and sustainment. Their past performance on similar contracts would be a key factor considered during the evaluation of this bid. While specific details of past performance on contracts identical to this one are not provided, SAIC's overall profile suggests they possess the capability and experience to manage a contract of this scope and complexity for USCENTCOM.

How does the total contract value of $627 million compare to the average contract size for similar IT support services within the defense sector?

The total contract value of $627 million over approximately seven years places this contract in the upper tier of IT support service agreements within the defense sector. Average contract sizes can vary significantly based on the specific services, agency, and duration. However, large-scale enterprise IT support for combatant commands like USCENTCOM often involves substantial investments. Contracts in the hundreds of millions of dollars are not uncommon for comprehensive IT sustainment, modernization, and operational support. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to benchmark against contracts for similar services (e.g., network management, cybersecurity, system integration, help desk support) awarded to large system integrators supporting agencies like the Army, Navy, Air Force, or other combatant commands. Generally, this award is indicative of a significant, long-term requirement.

What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration contract (2505 days) for IT support services?

Long-duration contracts, such as this 2505-day (approximately 7-year) award, present several potential risks for IT support services. Technology evolves rapidly, and a seven-year contract term could lead to the services or systems becoming outdated before the contract expires, requiring costly modifications or workarounds. There's also the risk of 'vendor lock-in,' where the government becomes heavily reliant on a single contractor, potentially reducing leverage for future negotiations or service improvements. Performance degradation over time is another concern; a contractor's initial high performance might wane. Furthermore, managing such a long-term contract requires sustained oversight to ensure continued alignment with evolving mission needs and budget realities. Finally, economic or geopolitical shifts could impact the necessity or funding of the services over such an extended period.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010 SUNSET HILLS RD, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $678,113,826

Exercised Options: $668,886,407

Current Obligation: $627,008,057

Actual Outlays: $-49,116

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 253

Total Subaward Amount: $265,209,355

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q09BGD0048

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline