State Department's $90.6M Vanguard 2.3.1 contract for IT services awarded to Buchanan & Edwards, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $90,618,645 ($90.6M)

Contractor: Buchanan & Edwards, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2013-09-29

End Date: 2020-06-28

Contract Duration: 2,464 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF "VANGUARD 2.3.1" IRM APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONS, AND MAINTENANCE. ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, O&M SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22209

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $90.6 million to BUCHANAN & EDWARDS, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF "VANGUARD 2.3.1" IRM APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONS, AND MAINTENANCE. ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, O&M SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, indicating a potentially competitive pricing environment. 2. The contract duration of 2464 days suggests a long-term need for these IT services. 3. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 4. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541512 points to computer systems design services. 6. The contract's value of over $90 million over its term warrants scrutiny for value for money. 7. The contractor, Buchanan & Edwards, Inc., has a significant contract value associated with this award.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $90.6 million over approximately 6.7 years averages to about $13.5 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale IT development and maintenance contracts for federal agencies is challenging without more specific service details. However, the firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for value if managed effectively. The absence of detailed performance metrics makes a definitive value assessment difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This indicates that while the competition was initially broad, certain sources may have been excluded prior to the final award decision. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation generally suggests a robust competitive process. This type of competition is intended to foster price discovery and ensure the government receives competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition, even with exclusions, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple vendors to bid, which can drive down costs and improve service quality.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of State, which receives critical IT applications development, operations, and maintenance services. These services support the department's internal operations and potentially its diplomatic and foreign policy missions. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the Department of State's facilities, primarily in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. The contract supports a workforce of IT professionals employed by Buchanan & Edwards, Inc. and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type requires further investigation to understand its impact on the breadth of competition.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the contractor's effectiveness and value delivered.
The significant contract value over a long duration necessitates ongoing monitoring for potential cost creep or scope expansion.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type places cost control responsibility on the contractor.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process was utilized.
The contract addresses essential IT infrastructure and services for a major federal agency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on enterprise software applications development, operations, and maintenance. The federal IT services market is substantial, with agencies consistently investing in modernizing and maintaining their technological infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale IT support contracts awarded by agencies like the Department of Defense or Homeland Security, considering factors like contract type, duration, and specific service offerings.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a small business set-aside. However, the prime contractor, Buchanan & Edwards, Inc., may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall business strategy, but this is not mandated by the contract terms provided.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the program office within the Department of State. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which holds the contractor responsible for delivering services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS-NG, though detailed performance reports may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of State IT Modernization Programs
Federal Enterprise Architecture Initiatives
Government-wide IT Services Contracts (e.g., GSA Schedules)
Software Development and Maintenance Services
IT Operations and Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Competition Clause Ambiguity
Lack of Performance Metrics
Potential for Limited Competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $90.6 million to BUCHANAN & EDWARDS, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF "VANGUARD 2.3.1" IRM APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONS, AND MAINTENANCE. ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, O&M SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BUCHANAN & EDWARDS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $90.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-09-29. End: 2020-06-28.

What specific IT applications and systems are covered under the Vanguard 2.3.1 contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact IT applications and systems covered under the Vanguard 2.3.1 contract. It broadly categorizes the services as 'ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT, O&M SERVICES.' To understand the specifics, one would need to consult the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS). These documents typically detail the scope of work, deliverables, and technical requirements for the applications and systems the contractor is responsible for developing, operating, and maintaining. Without this information, it's difficult to assess the criticality or complexity of the systems involved.

How does the $90.6 million contract value compare to similar IT services contracts awarded by the Department of State?

Comparing the $90.6 million value of the Vanguard 2.3.1 contract requires context regarding the specific services provided and the contract's duration (approximately 6.7 years). The Department of State, like other large federal agencies, procures a wide range of IT services, from cybersecurity to cloud migration and application development. A contract of this magnitude suggests a significant, long-term requirement for comprehensive IT support. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify other large-scale IT development, operations, and maintenance contracts within the State Department, noting their total obligated amounts, period of performance, and the nature of the services. Without such comparative data, it's challenging to definitively state whether $90.6 million represents a high, low, or average expenditure for similar scope and duration.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this contract?

The provided summary data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for the Vanguard 2.3.1 contract. These metrics are crucial for evaluating the contractor's performance and ensuring the government receives the expected value. Typically, KPIs and SLAs would be detailed in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) and would cover aspects like system uptime, response times for issue resolution, software defect rates, and project delivery timelines. The absence of this information in the summary prevents an assessment of the contractor's adherence to performance standards and the overall effectiveness of the services delivered.

What is the track record of Buchanan & Edwards, Inc. in performing similar federal IT contracts?

Buchanan & Edwards, Inc. has a history of performing federal IT contracts, including work with agencies like the Department of State. The Vanguard 2.3.1 contract itself, with a value of over $90 million and a duration of nearly seven years, indicates a substantial engagement. To assess their track record thoroughly, one would examine past performance evaluations, contract completion history, and any documented issues or successes on previous government contracts. Information on their performance on other State Department contracts, or similar large-scale IT development and O&M projects for other agencies, would provide further insight into their capabilities, reliability, and ability to manage complex IT requirements effectively.

What is the potential impact of the 'exclusion of sources' clause on the overall competition and pricing?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' clause suggests that while the competition was initially intended to be broad, certain potential bidders were excluded before the final solicitation or award phase. The specific reasons for these exclusions are not detailed in the summary data. Depending on the number and nature of the excluded sources, this could potentially limit the competitive landscape. If significant competitors were excluded, it might reduce the pressure on the remaining bidders to offer the lowest possible price, potentially impacting the value for money achieved. Conversely, if the exclusions were based on specific technical requirements or past performance criteria that only a few highly qualified vendors could meet, it might be a justifiable measure to ensure capability.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1700 N. MOORE STREET, SUITE 2110, ARLINGTON, VA, 22209

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $222,974,604

Exercised Options: $166,330,988

Current Obligation: $90,618,645

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS06F0717Z

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline