General Dynamics IT awarded $22.5M for FSA's MIDAS solution O&M support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,461,627 ($22.5M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2013-09-27

End Date: 2015-09-29

Contract Duration: 732 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF PROCURE O&M SUPPORT FOR THE FSA'S MIDAS SOLUTION IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SYSTEM AVAILABILITY, STABILITY, AND DATA INTEGRITY.

Place of Performance

Location: FAIRFAX, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22033

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $22.5 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF PROCURE O&M SUPPORT FOR THE FSA'S MIDAS SOLUTION IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SYSTEM AVAILABILITY, STABILITY, AND DATA INTEGRITY. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on maintaining system availability, stability, and data integrity for the FSA's MIDAS solution. 2. The contract was not competed under simplified acquisition procedures, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies. 3. A Time and Materials contract type can pose risks if not closely managed, potentially leading to cost overruns. 4. The duration of 732 days suggests a significant, ongoing need for these O&M services. 5. The award to General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. indicates a reliance on established IT service providers. 6. The contract's value is moderate within the context of federal IT operations and maintenance spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $22.5 million over approximately two years for IT O&M support is within a typical range for federal contracts of this nature. However, without specific benchmarks for the MIDAS solution or comparable O&M contracts for similar systems, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while common for O&M, can lead to higher costs if not managed diligently, as it doesn't inherently incentivize efficiency as much as fixed-price contracts. Further analysis would require understanding the labor rates and the scope of work performed.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

The contract was noted as 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP,' which implies it was not competed using simplified acquisition procedures. The specific method of procurement is not detailed, but this designation suggests it may have been awarded through other means, potentially including sole-source or limited competition if exceptions applied. Without further information on the solicitation process, it's difficult to ascertain the number of bidders or the extent of competition. This lack of clear competition could impact price discovery and potentially lead to less favorable pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: When a contract is not competed openly, taxpayers may not benefit from the most competitive pricing achievable through a broader solicitation process. This can result in higher overall costs for the government.

Public Impact

Federal civilian agencies, specifically the Federal Student Aid (FSA), benefit from the continued operation and integrity of the MIDAS solution. Essential IT operations and maintenance support services are delivered to ensure the MIDAS system remains functional and reliable. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational sphere of the FSA, supporting its internal IT infrastructure. Workforce implications are likely related to the IT professionals at General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. who are tasked with providing these support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The Time and Materials contract type carries inherent risk of cost escalation if not closely monitored and managed.
Lack of clear competition details raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible pricing.
The specific nature of 'Other Computer Related Services' can be broad, potentially leading to scope creep if not well-defined.

Positive Signals

The contract aims to ensure critical system availability, stability, and data integrity, which are vital for agency operations.
The award is to an established IT services provider, General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc., suggesting a level of confidence in their capabilities.
The contract duration indicates a sustained need and commitment to maintaining the MIDAS solution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) services sector, specifically focusing on Operations and Maintenance (O&M) for a critical government system. The IT services market is vast, with significant federal spending allocated to software development, maintenance, and support. Comparable spending benchmarks for IT O&M contracts can vary widely based on system complexity, criticality, and vendor rates. Federal agencies often rely on large IT contractors like General Dynamics for these types of services due to their scale and expertise.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc., will likely perform the majority of the work. The absence of small business participation could mean missed opportunities for small businesses to contribute to this federal IT support effort and potentially limit their ability to gain experience with large-scale government contracts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS), which awarded the contract. The contract's performance would be monitored by contracting officers and program managers within the FSA. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. While no specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction is mentioned, the GSA IG generally oversees GSA's operations and contract management. Accountability measures would be tied to the performance standards outlined in the contract's Statement of Work.

Related Government Programs

Federal IT Operations and Maintenance Contracts
General Services Administration IT Support Services
Federal Student Aid IT Systems
IT Services for Civilian Agencies

Risk Flags

Lack of clear competition details
Time and Materials contract type risk
Potential for unoptimized pricing due to non-SAP competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $22.5 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF PROCURE O&M SUPPORT FOR THE FSA'S MIDAS SOLUTION IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SYSTEM AVAILABILITY, STABILITY, AND DATA INTEGRITY.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-09-27. End: 2015-09-29.

What is the specific nature and criticality of the MIDAS solution that necessitates this O&M support?

The MIDAS solution is utilized by the Federal Student Aid (FSA) agency. Its primary functions, as suggested by the contract's objective, revolve around ensuring system availability, stability, and data integrity. While the exact details of MIDAS are not publicly elaborated in the provided data, its critical nature is implied by the sustained need for dedicated O&M support valued at over $22 million. Such systems often underpin core agency functions, such as processing financial aid applications, managing student loan data, or facilitating financial transactions. Failures in availability, stability, or data integrity for such systems could have significant repercussions on the agency's ability to serve its constituents, manage federal funds, and maintain accurate records. The contract's focus on these three pillars highlights the importance of robust IT infrastructure management for the FSA.

How does the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type compare to other pricing structures for IT O&M in terms of cost-effectiveness for the government?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts are often used when the scope of work is not clearly defined or is expected to fluctuate, which can be common in IT Operations and Maintenance (O&M). For the government, T&M contracts can be less cost-effective than fixed-price contracts if not managed rigorously. This is because T&M contracts reimburse the contractor for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred, plus a fixed fee or profit. If the contractor's efficiency is low, or if the scope expands without adequate oversight, costs can escalate beyond initial expectations. Fixed-price contracts, conversely, offer greater cost certainty as the price is set upfront, incentivizing the contractor to be efficient. However, fixed-price contracts require a very well-defined scope, which can be challenging for evolving O&M needs. For IT O&M, a hybrid approach or a well-defined T&M contract with strong oversight, labor rate caps, and performance metrics is often employed to balance flexibility with cost control.

What are the potential risks associated with General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. not having a strong track record with the FSA or similar systems?

While the provided data indicates General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. (GDIT) as the awardee, it does not detail their specific track record with the Federal Student Aid (FSA) or the MIDAS solution itself. If GDIT is a new or less experienced vendor for this specific system or agency, potential risks could include a steeper learning curve, longer response times to issues, and a less nuanced understanding of the system's unique operational requirements. This could lead to delays in problem resolution, suboptimal maintenance practices, or increased costs as the contractor familiarizes themselves with the environment. Conversely, established vendors often bring institutional knowledge and pre-existing relationships that can streamline operations. A thorough review of GDIT's past performance, particularly on similar government IT O&M contracts, would be necessary to fully assess this risk.

How does the $22.5 million contract value compare to historical federal spending on IT O&M for similar systems?

The $22.5 million contract value for approximately two years of IT O&M support for the FSA's MIDAS solution represents a moderate investment within the broader federal IT landscape. Federal spending on IT O&M can range from millions to billions of dollars annually, depending on the agency, the complexity and criticality of the systems involved, and the scope of services required. For a system like MIDAS, which appears to be crucial for FSA's operations, this figure is plausible. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze historical spending data for similar IT O&M contracts awarded by agencies like the Department of Education (which oversees FSA) or other agencies managing large student information systems or financial processing platforms. Benchmarking against contracts for systems of comparable size, user base, and functional scope would offer a more accurate perspective on whether this award represents competitive pricing and efficient resource allocation.

What are the implications of this contract being 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' for transparency and potential cost savings?

The designation 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' (Simplified Acquisition Procedures) implies that the contract was not procured through the streamlined processes available for purchases below the simplified acquisition threshold (typically $250,000). This means the procurement likely involved more formal procedures, but the specific method (e.g., full and open competition, sole source, limited competition) is not detailed. If the contract was not competed broadly, it suggests potential missed opportunities for cost savings that often arise from robust competition. SAP is designed for efficiency, but larger, more complex procurements often require different methods. The key implication here is the lack of clarity on the competitive landscape. If it was a sole-source or limited competition award, the government may not have received the benefit of multiple bids driving down prices. Transparency is reduced when the full competitive process isn't evident, making it harder to assess if the government obtained the best value.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Csra LLC (UEI: 080011988)

Address: 4300 FAIR LAKES CT, FAIRFAX, VA, 22033

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,746,134

Exercised Options: $23,077,282

Current Obligation: $22,461,627

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GSTFMGBPA100001

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline