DoD's $27.4M technical support contract with Orbis Sibro Inc. shows fair value despite limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,375,703 ($27.4M)

Contractor: Orbis Sibro Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2017-06-20

End Date: 2024-06-14

Contract Duration: 2,551 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF TECHNICAL, PROGRAMMATIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF SEA21

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20222

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.4 million to ORBIS SIBRO INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF TECHNICAL, PROGRAMMATIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF SEA21 Key points: 1. Contract value of $27.4M over 7 years suggests a moderate annual spend. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, but only 6 bids were received, indicating potentially limited market engagement. 3. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract type introduces performance-based incentives but can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. The contract supports SEA21 program, a critical component of naval readiness. 5. The contract's duration of 2551 days (approx. 7 years) allows for sustained support but requires ongoing performance monitoring. 6. The small business set-aside flag is false, indicating no specific provisions for small business participation. 7. The contract is geographically concentrated in the District of Columbia.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $27.4M over approximately seven years averages around $3.9M annually. Benchmarking this against similar technical, programmatic, and IT support services for defense programs is challenging without more granular data on the specific services provided. However, the CPIF contract type suggests an effort to align contractor performance with government objectives, which can be a value-driver if incentives are well-structured and achievable. The award amount of $10.7M (br) appears to be a specific delivery order or initial award, not the total contract value, making direct comparison difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which is generally favorable for price discovery. However, the receipt of only 6 bids suggests that the market for this specific type of support may be concentrated among a few capable contractors, or that the solicitation requirements were highly specialized. While competition was present, the relatively low number of bidders could limit the downward pressure on pricing compared to a scenario with numerous competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is a positive signal for taxpayers, as it aims to ensure the government receives offers from the widest possible range of qualified sources. The presence of 6 bidders indicates some level of market interest, but the limited number warrants further investigation into potential barriers to entry for other firms.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, specifically naval operations supported by the SEA21 program. The contract delivers essential technical, programmatic, and information technology support services. The geographic impact is concentrated in the District of Columbia, where the contractor is located and likely where services are performed or managed. The contract supports a specialized workforce in engineering and IT services, contributing to the defense industrial base.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited number of bidders (6) in a full and open competition could indicate potential market concentration or specialized requirements that limit broader participation.
The CPIF contract type, while incentivizing, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if performance targets are not met or if scope creep occurs without adequate oversight.
The contract duration of approximately 7 years requires sustained vigilance to ensure continued alignment with evolving DoD needs and technological advancements.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, maximizing potential for a competitive process.
The CPIF contract structure aims to align contractor incentives with government objectives, potentially leading to improved performance and efficiency.
The contract provides critical support services for the SEA21 program, contributing to national defense objectives.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), which is a significant component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry supporting the federal government. The defense sector, in particular, relies heavily on specialized engineering and IT support for complex systems like naval platforms. Annual federal spending on engineering services can reach tens of billions of dollars, with a substantial portion allocated to defense contracts. This specific contract represents a focused investment within that larger landscape, aimed at maintaining and enhancing critical naval capabilities.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that this was not a small business set-aside (ss=false, sb=false). Therefore, there are no explicit requirements for small business participation or subcontracting targets mandated by the contract itself. This means that opportunities for small businesses would likely arise indirectly through the prime contractor's own procurement practices or if they choose to engage small businesses as subcontractors, rather than through a direct set-aside provision.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), as indicated by the 'sa' field. DCMA is responsible for ensuring contractor compliance with contract terms, monitoring performance, and verifying costs. The CPIF contract type necessitates close monitoring of performance metrics to ensure incentive goals are met and costs are controlled. Transparency would be facilitated through contract reporting requirements and potentially through the DoD's contract data repositories, though specific IG jurisdiction details would depend on the nature of any potential issues.

Related Government Programs

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Programs
Defense IT Support Services
Program Management Support Contracts
Engineering Services for Defense Platforms

Risk Flags

Limited Competition Indicator
CPIF Contract Type Risk
Long Contract Duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.4 million to ORBIS SIBRO INC. IGF::OT::IGF TECHNICAL, PROGRAMMATIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF SEA21

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ORBIS SIBRO INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $27.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-06-20. End: 2024-06-14.

What is the track record of Orbis Sibro Inc. in performing similar technical, programmatic, and IT support services for the Department of Defense?

Assessing Orbis Sibro Inc.'s track record requires a review of their past performance on similar contracts. This would involve examining contract databases for previous awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any documented instances of outstanding performance or deficiencies. Without access to specific past performance data for Orbis Sibro Inc. on contracts of comparable scope and complexity, it is difficult to definitively gauge their reliability and capability in delivering the required technical, programmatic, and IT support. A thorough review would look for consistent delivery, adherence to schedules and budgets, and positive stakeholder feedback on prior engagements.

How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar technical support contracts within the Navy or DoD?

The average annual cost of this contract is approximately $3.9M ($27.4M / 7 years). To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against contracts for similar services (technical, programmatic, IT support) awarded to other entities supporting naval programs or comparable DoD systems. Factors such as the specific scope of work, required expertise, security clearances, and contract type (e.g., CPIF vs. FFP) significantly influence pricing. A preliminary assessment suggests this annual spend is moderate for specialized defense support, but a definitive comparison requires access to detailed service descriptions and pricing structures of comparable contracts.

What are the primary risks associated with the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract type in this context?

The primary risks associated with a CPIF contract type, such as this one, revolve around cost control and the potential for contractor behavior to prioritize profit over efficiency if incentives are not perfectly aligned or if oversight is insufficient. While CPIF aims to incentivize performance by allowing the contractor to earn a higher fee if they exceed targets (or share in savings if they come under budget), it also means the final cost is not fixed. Risks include potential for scope creep, where the contractor may seek to expand the scope to achieve higher incentive fees, or difficulty in accurately defining and measuring performance targets. If targets are too easily met or too difficult, the incentive may be ineffective. Robust government oversight is crucial to manage these risks.

What is the historical spending trend for technical, programmatic, and IT support services within the SEA21 program or similar naval initiatives?

Analyzing historical spending trends for technical, programmatic, and IT support services within the SEA21 program or similar naval initiatives would provide context on the scale and evolution of such investments. This involves examining contract data over several fiscal years to identify patterns in spending levels, types of services procured, and key contractors. Significant increases or decreases in spending could indicate shifts in program priorities, technological advancements, or changes in contracting strategies. Understanding these trends helps in evaluating whether the current contract's value aligns with historical investment patterns and future projected needs for naval readiness and modernization.

How does the geographic concentration in the District of Columbia impact the delivery and oversight of these services?

The geographic concentration in the District of Columbia, where the contractor Orbis Sibro Inc. is located, can have several implications. For service delivery, it may facilitate closer collaboration and communication between the contractor's team and government personnel if they are co-located or nearby. However, it could also limit the contractor's direct access to or understanding of operational environments elsewhere if the services primarily involve on-site support at various naval facilities. From an oversight perspective, DC-based contractors might be more readily accessible for in-person meetings and reviews by DCMA or other oversight bodies. Conversely, if services are intended to support geographically dispersed operations, a concentrated DC presence might necessitate robust remote management and communication protocols.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering 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

Solicitation ID: N0002416R3015

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 238 ALBEMARLE RD, CHARLESTON, SC, 29407

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,112,561

Exercised Options: $30,112,561

Current Obligation: $27,375,703

Actual Outlays: $12,201

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4100

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline