DoD's $95.8M contract for engineering services to Southeastern Computer Consulta raises value and competition concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,689,479 ($24.7M)

Contractor: Southeastern Computer Consulta

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1999-09-30

End Date: 2010-09-16

Contract Duration: 4,004 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.2K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 199912!1700!1472!AT717!NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001999C1542 !A!*!* !19990930!20030930!958560773!958560773!958560773!N!1W582!SOUTHEASTERN COMPUTER CONSULTA!904 PRINCESS ANNE ST !FREDERICKSBURG !VA!22401!05000!453!48!AUSTIN !TRAVIS !TEXAS !0001!+000002537140!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !2GIF!MISSION DISTRIBUTION SYS (MDS)!7373!3!*!*!*!B!A!*!D !U!U!1!001!N!1A!Z!Y!Z!* !* !N!B!*!A!*!A!A!A!*!* !*!N!A!B!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: KING GEORGE, KING GEORGE County, VIRGINIA, 22485

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.7 million to SOUTHEASTERN COMPUTER CONSULTA for work described as: 199912!1700!1472!AT717!NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001999C1542 !A!*!* !19990930!20030930!958560773!958560773!958560773!N!1W582!SOUTHEASTERN COMPUTER CONSULTA!904 PRINCESS ANNE ST !FREDERICKSBURG !VA!22401!05000!453!48!AUSTIN !TRAVIS… Key points: 1. The contract's value of $95.8 million over its lifetime appears high for the services rendered, with a significant portion awarded on a sole-source basis. 2. Limited competition for a substantial portion of the contract raises questions about price discovery and potential overpayment. 3. The contract's extended duration of over 10 years suggests a long-term need, but the lack of robust competition throughout warrants scrutiny. 4. Performance context is limited, but the award to a single vendor for a significant period may indicate a lack of market dynamism. 5. The contract falls within the broader Defense sector, specifically supporting missile and space systems and mission distribution systems. 6. The absence of small business set-asides or subcontracting plans suggests limited direct benefit to the small business ecosystem in this instance.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total value of $95.8 million for engineering and technical services over more than a decade appears substantial. Benchmarking against similar contracts is difficult without more specific service details, but the lack of competition for a significant portion of the work suggests potential for inflated pricing. The contract type, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, can sometimes lead to higher costs if not carefully managed and monitored, especially when competition is limited. Without more granular data on the specific services provided and their market rates, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money, but the circumstances raise flags.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the unique capabilities or resources required for the specific service. However, for a contract of this magnitude and duration, a lack of broader competition raises concerns about whether alternative solutions or vendors were adequately explored. The absence of a competitive bidding process limits the government's ability to secure the best possible pricing and terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be getting the most competitive pricing. Without the pressure of multiple bids, the awarded contractor may not have had an incentive to offer the lowest possible cost, potentially leading to higher overall expenditure for the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its various commands requiring specialized engineering and technical services. The contract supports critical functions related to missile and space systems, as well as mission distribution systems, contributing to national security. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, with the contractor located in Fredericksburg, Virginia, and the awarding agency being the Naval Air Systems Command. Workforce implications include the direct employment of personnel by Southeastern Computer Consulta to fulfill the contract's technical requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Extended contract duration without robust competition may indicate a missed opportunity for better value.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can be susceptible to cost overruns if not tightly managed, especially with limited oversight.
Lack of transparency regarding the justification for sole-source award.
Limited information available on performance metrics and outcomes.

Positive Signals

Contract supports critical defense systems, indicating a potentially high level of specialized expertise.
The contractor has secured a significant, long-term award, suggesting a degree of trust or established relationship with the agency.
The contract is managed by the Naval Air Systems Command, a major defense procurement entity.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense Information Technology and Engineering Services sector. The market for such specialized engineering and technical support is often characterized by a limited number of highly qualified firms capable of meeting stringent government requirements. While specific market size data for this niche is not readily available, the Department of Defense is a major consumer of these services, with annual spending in the hundreds of billions across various categories. This contract represents a portion of that broader spending, focused on specific weapon systems and distribution technologies.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included small business set-asides. The sole-source nature of the award further suggests that opportunities for small business subcontracting were likely not a primary consideration or requirement. This means the direct economic benefits to the small business ecosystem from this specific contract are likely minimal, as the prime contract was awarded to a single, presumably larger, entity.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), the awarding agency. As a Department of Defense contract, it would also be subject to oversight from the Department of Defense Inspector General (DoDIG) for issues of fraud, waste, and abuse. Transparency regarding specific oversight mechanisms, performance reviews, and audit reports is limited in the provided data. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) necessitates diligent financial oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and allocable.

Related Government Programs

Missile Systems Procurement
Aerospace Engineering Services
Defense IT Services
Command and Control Systems
Mission Systems Development

Risk Flags

Sole-source award without clear justification.
Potential for lack of price competition.
Extended contract duration may not reflect current market value.
Limited transparency on performance metrics.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.7 million to SOUTHEASTERN COMPUTER CONSULTA. 199912!1700!1472!AT717!NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001999C1542 !A!*!* !19990930!20030930!958560773!958560773!958560773!N!1W582!SOUTHEASTERN COMPUTER CONSULTA!904 PRINCESS ANNE ST !FREDERICKSBURG !VA!22401!05000!453!48!AUSTIN !TRAVIS !TEXAS !0001!+000002537140!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !2GIF!MISSION DISTRIBUTION SYS (MDS)!7373!3!*!*!*!B!A!*!D !U!U!1!0

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SOUTHEASTERN COMPUTER CONSULTA.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-09-30. End: 2010-09-16.

What specific engineering and technical services were provided under this contract, and how do they align with the contractor's stated capabilities?

The data indicates the contract was for 'ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES' and falls under 'MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS' and 'MISSION DISTRIBUTION SYS (MDS)'. Southeastern Computer Consulta, based in Fredericksburg, VA, was the contractor. While the specific deliverables are not detailed, the classification suggests services related to the design, development, testing, and maintenance of missile and space systems, as well as systems for distributing mission-critical information. The contractor's capabilities would need to align with these highly specialized defense technology areas. Further investigation into the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) would be necessary to fully understand the scope and nature of the services rendered and to precisely match them against the contractor's expertise.

How was the sole-source justification for this $95.8 million contract determined, and were there any attempts to explore competitive alternatives?

The justification for a sole-source award typically rests on specific criteria outlined in federal acquisition regulations, such as the existence of only one responsible source, or a compelling urgency that precludes full and open competition. For a contract of this magnitude and duration, the agency (Naval Air Systems Command) would have had to formally document why competition was not feasible. This often involves market research to confirm the lack of other capable vendors or unique proprietary technology. Without access to the official sole-source justification documentation, it's impossible to detail the specific reasons. However, the lack of competition for such a large award warrants scrutiny to ensure taxpayer funds were used judiciously and that alternatives were genuinely not viable.

What is the historical spending pattern with Southeastern Computer Consulta for similar services, and does this contract represent an increase or decrease in spending?

The provided data represents a single contract award of $95,856,077.30 to Southeastern Computer Consulta. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to access historical contract databases (like FPDS or USASpending) to identify any prior contracts awarded to this vendor, particularly for similar services. This current contract, with an initial award value and potential for modifications, spans from September 30, 1999, to September 30, 2003, with an extended period to 2010. Without prior contract data, it's impossible to definitively state if this represents an increase or decrease. However, the significant value of this single award suggests it was a substantial engagement for the contractor and the agency.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how has the contractor performed against them?

The provided data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or performance evaluation metrics for this contract. Typically, such information would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and subsequent performance reports. For a contract of this nature, KPIs might relate to system reliability, delivery timelines for technical documentation, successful integration of components, or adherence to technical specifications. Performance assessments are usually conducted by the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) or the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). Without access to these internal performance records, it is not possible to assess the contractor's performance against established benchmarks.

Are there any known risks associated with Southeastern Computer Consulta as a contractor, such as past performance issues or financial instability?

The provided data does not contain information regarding past performance issues, financial instability, or other specific risks associated with Southeastern Computer Consulta. Contractor risk assessments are typically conducted by the awarding agency during the procurement process and are often documented in pre-award surveys and performance evaluations. While this contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, implying a level of confidence from the agency, it does not preclude the possibility of underlying risks. A comprehensive risk assessment would require access to contractor performance databases, CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) reports, and potentially financial health assessments.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Contractor Details

Address: 904 PRINCESS ANNE ST, FREDERICKSBURG, VA, 07

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline