Interior's $18.9M document search contract awarded to Cherokee Services Group LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,911,923 ($18.9M)

Contractor: Cherokee Services Group LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2010-08-13

End Date: 2013-09-02

Contract Duration: 1,116 days

Daily Burn Rate: $16.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS

Sector: Other

Official Description: DOCUMENT SEARCH SERVICES FOR OHTA LITIGATIONS

Place of Performance

Location: LENEXA, JOHNSON County, KANSAS, 66219

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $18.9 million to CHEROKEE SERVICES GROUP LLC for work described as: DOCUMENT SEARCH SERVICES FOR OHTA LITIGATIONS Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting competitive price discovery. 2. Duration of over three years suggests a sustained need for these services. 3. The contract's value is significant, warranting scrutiny of its cost-effectiveness. 4. Performance period ended in 2013, indicating historical data analysis. 5. The specific services provided are critical for litigation support. 6. Geographic location of performance is Kansas.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value for this specific contract is challenging due to the lack of readily available comparable sole-source awards for similar litigation support services. The total value of $18.9 million over approximately three years suggests a substantial investment. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing was optimal or if it represented a fair market value. Further analysis would require access to internal cost breakdowns or historical pricing data for similar services within the Department of the Interior.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to full and open competition. This typically occurs when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the agency's needs. The lack of competition means that potential cost savings that could arise from a competitive bidding process were likely not realized. The justification for a sole-source award would need to demonstrate why other qualified vendors could not provide the required services.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government does not benefit from the price reductions typically driven by competition among multiple bidders.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of the Interior's legal teams, who received essential support for litigation. The services delivered included document search and management, crucial for legal case preparation and defense. The contract's impact was geographically focused on Kansas, where the services were performed. The contract supported specialized roles within the legal support services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits transparency and potential cost savings.
Lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than a competed contract.
Contract performance ended in 2013, requiring analysis of historical effectiveness.

Positive Signals

Provided critical litigation support services to the Department of the Interior.
Contract was awarded to a single entity, suggesting specialized capabilities.
Services were delivered over a defined period, indicating a structured approach.

Sector Analysis

The IT professional services sector encompasses a wide range of support functions for government agencies. This contract falls under the category of IT professional services, specifically focusing on facilities management and computer-related services, which are essential for supporting complex government operations like litigation. The market for such services is competitive, but sole-source awards can occur for specialized needs. Benchmarking this contract's value against other sole-source IT support contracts within the federal government would provide further context on its cost-effectiveness.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans for this specific contract is not available in the provided data. As a sole-source award, it is less likely to have been specifically targeted for small business participation through set-aside mechanisms. Further investigation into the contractor's size status and any subcontracting reports would be necessary to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the contracting officer (CO) within the Department of the Interior. Accountability would be managed through contract performance reviews and adherence to the terms and conditions of the award. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award; however, contract award data is generally publicly available through federal procurement databases.

Related Government Programs

Department of the Interior Litigation Support Services
Federal Legal Support Contracts
IT Professional Services for Government Agencies
Document Management and Search Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing.
Lack of performance metrics in summary data.
Historical contract data (ended 2013).

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $18.9 million to CHEROKEE SERVICES GROUP LLC. DOCUMENT SEARCH SERVICES FOR OHTA LITIGATIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CHEROKEE SERVICES GROUP LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (Departmental Offices).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-08-13. End: 2013-09-02.

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

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which is synonymous with a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not detailed in the summary data. Typically, sole-source awards are justified under specific circumstances outlined in federal acquisition regulations, such as when only one responsible source is available, or in cases of urgent and compelling need. Without the official justification document (e.g., a Justification and Approval - J&A), the precise reasons remain unknown. This lack of competition limits the ability to assess if alternative, potentially more cost-effective solutions were overlooked.

How does the cost per day or per year compare to similar sole-source litigation support contracts?

Direct comparison of cost per day or year to similar sole-source litigation support contracts is challenging without access to a broader dataset of comparable sole-source awards and their specific service scopes. The total award was $18,911,922.86 over a period from August 13, 2010, to September 2, 2013, which is approximately 3 years and 20 days (or about 1116 days). This averages to roughly $16,946 per day. However, this daily rate is an aggregate and does not account for varying levels of service, complexity, or specific tasks performed on any given day. Sole-source contracts, by their nature, lack a competitive benchmark, making 'fairness' of cost difficult to ascertain without internal cost data or detailed market research conducted by the agency at the time of award.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how did the contractor perform against them?

The provided summary data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or details on the contractor's performance against them. For a contract of this nature, KPIs would likely relate to the accuracy and completeness of document searches, turnaround times for document retrieval, data security protocols, and overall support provided to the legal teams. Performance evaluations are typically documented in contract administration files. Without access to these performance reports or contract close-out documentation, it is impossible to assess whether Cherokee Services Group LLC met or exceeded expectations during the contract period.

What is the track record of Cherokee Services Group LLC in performing similar federal contracts?

Cherokee Services Group LLC has a history of performing federal contracts, though the specifics of their track record in 'document search services for OHTA litigations' require deeper investigation beyond the summary data. The provided information shows this was a significant award for them. To assess their track record thoroughly, one would need to examine other contracts awarded to them, particularly those involving similar services (e.g., litigation support, document management, IT services) and agencies. Analyzing past performance evaluations, any contract disputes, or awards for exceptional performance would provide a more comprehensive view of their capabilities and reliability.

Were there any identified risks associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?

The summary data does not explicitly list identified risks or mitigation strategies for this contract. However, common risks associated with large, sole-source IT and litigation support contracts can include cost overruns, performance deficiencies, security breaches, and contractor dependency. Given the sole-source nature, a primary risk is the potential for inflated pricing due to lack of competition. Mitigation strategies would typically involve robust contract oversight, clear performance standards, and potentially independent cost analyses if feasible. The fact that the contract was awarded and completed suggests that the agency deemed the risks manageable at the time.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Cherokee Nation (UEI: 077345494)

Address: 777 W CHEROKEE ST, CATOOSA, OK, 74015

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, HUBZone Firm, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,911,923

Exercised Options: $18,911,923

Current Obligation: $18,911,923

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: SUPPLIES OR SERVICES PURSUANT TO FAR 12.102(F)

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline