Defense contract for ADP systems development services awarded to Science Applications International Corp. for over $14.8 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,678,679 ($14.7M)

Contractor: Leidos, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-01

End Date: 2010-09-28

Contract Duration: 1,488 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: 200612!800264!1700!M67854!COMMANDING GENERAL !GS35F4461G !C!N! !N!M6785406F4958! !20060901!20070831!148095086!148095086!054781240!N!SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATI!10260 CAMPUS POINT DR !SAN DIEGO !CA!92121!21082!073!06!EAST SAN DIEGO !SAN DIEGO !CALIFORNIA!+000002000000!N!N!000000000000!D302!ADP SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541512!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B!F!Y! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !C!N! ! ! ! ! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !1727!M67854!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: QUANTICO, PRINCE WILLIAM County, VIRGINIA, 22134

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.7 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: 200612!800264!1700!M67854!COMMANDING GENERAL !GS35F4461G !C!N! !N!M6785406F4958! !20060901!20070831!148095086!148095086!054781240!N!SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATI!10260 CAMPUS POINT DR !SAN DIEGO !CA!92121!21082!073!06!EAST SAN DIEGO !SAN … Key points: 1. Contract value of $14.8M for ADP systems development services. 2. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, part of the Department of Defense. 3. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price, indicating predictable costs. 4. Duration of the contract was 1488 days, spanning from 2006 to 2010. 5. The contract was awarded under full and open competition. 6. The primary contractor is Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC).

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $14.8 million for ADP systems development services over approximately four years appears to be within a reasonable range for the period. Benchmarking against similar IT services contracts from the mid-2000s would provide a more precise assessment of value for money. Without specific details on the scope of services, a direct comparison of per-unit costs is challenging. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an effort to control costs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The data does not specify the number of bidders, but full and open competition generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. This approach is typically favored for its potential to achieve best value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition suggests that taxpayers benefited from a potentially more competitive bidding process, which could have resulted in lower prices or higher quality services than a sole-source award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Navy, receiving ADP systems development services. The services delivered are related to the development of automated data processing (ADP) systems. The geographic impact is likely within the operational areas of the Department of the Navy, primarily in Virginia where the contractor's facility is located. Workforce implications include employment for IT professionals and developers at Science Applications International Corp.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns if the scope of 'ADP systems development' was not clearly defined.
  • Risk of vendor lock-in if the developed systems were highly proprietary.
  • Dependence on a single contractor for critical system development.

Positive Signals

  • Firm Fixed Price contract structure helps in budget predictability.
  • Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
  • Award to a large, established contractor like SAIC may indicate a lower risk of performance failure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) sector, specifically focusing on software and systems development. The market for IT services to the federal government is substantial, with agencies constantly seeking to upgrade and maintain their data processing capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large-scale IT development contracts awarded by DoD agencies during the mid-2000s.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large contract awarded under full and open competition, it is unlikely to have significant direct subcontracting opportunities for small businesses unless specified in the contract terms, which are not detailed here. The focus appears to be on large prime contractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the Department of the Navy's program management office. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases like FPDS, though detailed performance reports are often internal.

Related Government Programs

  • Department of Defense IT Modernization Programs
  • Navy Command and Control Systems Development
  • Federal Civilian IT Services Contracts
  • ADP Systems Integration Services

Risk Flags

  • Potential for scope creep in system development projects.
  • Integration challenges with legacy systems.
  • Cybersecurity risks associated with new system deployments.

Tags

it-services, defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, systems-development, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, virginia, science-applications-international-corp, adp-systems

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.7 million to LEIDOS, INC.. 200612!800264!1700!M67854!COMMANDING GENERAL !GS35F4461G !C!N! !N!M6785406F4958! !20060901!20070831!148095086!148095086!054781240!N!SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATI!10260 CAMPUS POINT DR !SAN DIEGO !CA!92121!21082!073!06!EAST SAN DIEGO !SAN DIEGO !CALIFORNIA!+000002000000!N!N!000000000000!D302!ADP SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541512!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-01. End: 2010-09-28.

What was the specific nature of the ADP systems developed under this contract?

The contract data specifies 'ADP SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' with a Product Service Code (PSC) of 'D302' (ADP Systems Development Services). While the exact systems are not detailed in the provided data, this typically encompasses the design, development, testing, and implementation of new or upgraded automated data processing systems. These could range from financial management systems, logistics support systems, personnel management systems, or command and control systems, tailored to the specific needs of the Department of the Navy during that period. The contractor, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), is known for its broad IT and engineering capabilities, suggesting the project likely involved complex software engineering and integration.

How does the $14.8 million contract value compare to similar IT development contracts from the 2006-2010 period?

The $14.8 million contract value for ADP systems development services awarded between 2006 and 2010 is a significant sum, reflecting the complexity and scope typical of large federal IT projects. During this era, the Department of Defense was heavily invested in modernizing its IT infrastructure. Contracts of this magnitude were not uncommon for major system overhauls or new development initiatives. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze the specific deliverables and duration against other contracts with similar PSC codes (like D302) and agencies within the DoD. However, as a firm-fixed-price contract over approximately four years, it suggests a defined scope and a commitment to managing costs within a set budget, which was a key objective for federal IT spending at the time.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this specific contract. However, for an 'ADP SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' contract, typical KPIs would likely include adherence to project timelines, meeting technical specifications and performance requirements, successful system testing and integration, user acceptance, and potentially system reliability and maintainability post-deployment. For a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract, meeting the defined scope and deliverables within the agreed-upon price is a primary measure of success. The Department of the Navy would have established specific milestones and acceptance criteria that Science Applications International Corporation needed to meet to receive payment.

What is the track record of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) with the Department of Defense for similar services?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), now part of Leidos, has a long and extensive track record of providing IT, engineering, and support services to the Department of Defense (DoD) and its various branches, including the Department of the Navy. Historically, SAIC has been a major federal contractor involved in numerous large-scale system development, integration, and modernization projects across defense and civilian agencies. Their portfolio includes work on command and control systems, intelligence systems, logistics, cybersecurity, and enterprise IT infrastructure. Given their size and specialization, contracts like the one detailed here for ADP systems development were a core part of their business with the DoD during the period specified (2006-2010) and continue to be for Leidos.

Were there any notable risks or challenges associated with this contract?

While specific risk details are not provided, large-scale IT system development contracts inherently carry risks. For this contract, potential challenges could have included scope creep, where the requirements expanded beyond the initial agreement, potentially leading to cost overruns or delays (though mitigated by the FFP structure). Technical complexity and integration issues with existing Navy systems could also pose risks. Ensuring the security of the developed systems against evolving cyber threats would have been another critical concern. Furthermore, managing the transition and deployment of new systems to operational users within the Navy could present logistical and training challenges.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Retail TradeElectronics and Appliance StoresComputer and Software Stores

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 611641312)

Address: 1710 SAIC DRIVE, ROOM #8032, MCLEAN, VA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS35F4461G

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline

Start Date: 2006-09-01

Current End Date: 2010-09-28

Potential End Date: 2010-09-28 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2014-03-29

More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.

View all Leidos, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending