DoD's $1.57B telecommunications contract with Peraton Inc. awarded under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,696,749 ($15.7M)

Contractor: Peraton Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-11-10

End Date: 2009-03-27

Contract Duration: 1,233 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 18

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200603!000150!5700!FA8604!ASC/PKW !FA877104D0003 !A!N! !Y!SC05 !01 !20051110!20060930!602938771!602938771!602938771!N!MULTIMAX INC !13665 DULLES TECHNOLOGY DR!HERNDON !VA!20171!86660!057!39!WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB!GREENE !OHIO !+000001178800!N!N!000000000000!D399!OTHER ADP & TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541519!E! !5!B!M!C!A! !99990909!B!F!Y!A! !A!N!J!2!018!K! !A!N!Z! ! !N!A!N!N!B! ! ! !C!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: HERNDON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20171

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.7 million to PERATON INC. for work described as: 200603!000150!5700!FA8604!ASC/PKW !FA877104D0003 !A!N! !Y!SC05 !01 !20051110!20060930!602938771!602938771!602938771!N!MULTIMAX INC !13665 DULLES TECHNOLOGY DR!HERNDON !VA!20171!86660!057!39!WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB!GREE… Key points: 1. Contract awarded to Peraton Inc. for telecommunications services. 2. Significant value of $1.57 billion over its period of performance. 3. Procurement method was 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources', indicating a competitive process. 4. Contract duration of 1233 days suggests a long-term service requirement. 5. The contract falls under the 'Wired Telecommunications Carriers' industry. 6. Awarded by the Department of Defense, highlighting its strategic importance. 7. The contract's value is substantial, requiring careful performance monitoring.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $1.57 billion is significant, but without specific benchmarks for similar telecommunications services at this scale, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price nature suggests that cost risks are largely borne by the contractor, which can be favorable for the government. However, the absence of detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to market rates makes it difficult to definitively assess if the pricing is optimal. Further analysis would require benchmarking against other large-scale government telecommunications contracts or commercial equivalents.

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 procurement method implies that multiple sources were considered, and the exclusion of certain sources was justified, likely due to specific technical requirements or prior relationships. The fact that it was competed broadly suggests a healthy level of competition, which typically drives better pricing and service offerings for the government. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the 'full and open' designation is a positive indicator for price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally leads to more favorable pricing for taxpayers by leveraging market forces to secure the best value. This approach helps ensure that government funds are used efficiently and that the chosen contractor offers a compelling balance of cost and performance.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense is the primary beneficiary, receiving essential wired telecommunications services. The contract supports critical communication infrastructure for military operations and personnel. Services are likely delivered across various military installations, with a focus on the Virginia region where the contractor is located. The contract may have implications for the telecommunications workforce, potentially creating or sustaining jobs within the industry.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs, despite the fixed-price nature.
  • Dependence on a single contractor for critical telecommunications infrastructure.
  • Risk of service disruptions if the contractor faces financial or operational challenges.

Positive Signals

  • Firm fixed-price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor.
  • Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.
  • Contractor's location in Virginia may facilitate responsive service delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology and Telecommunications sector, specifically 'Wired Telecommunications Carriers'. The market for such services is characterized by significant infrastructure investment and a mix of large established players and specialized providers. Government spending in this area is substantial, supporting national security and operational needs. Benchmarking this contract's value against other large-scale federal telecommunications procurements would provide further context on its relative cost-effectiveness.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions or subcontracting requirements for this contract. As a large-value contract awarded through full and open competition, the primary focus is likely on securing the best overall value from the market. Further investigation would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved as subcontractors or if there are any indirect impacts on the small business ecosystem within the telecommunications sector.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of Defense contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which incentivizes the contractor to meet specifications within budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, although detailed performance metrics may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

  • Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) contracts
  • General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Telecommunications Services
  • Other Department of Defense IT and Communications Contracts

Risk Flags

  • Contract value is substantial, requiring diligent oversight.
  • Long contract duration may pose risks related to technological obsolescence or vendor performance.
  • Procurement method requires careful review of source exclusions.

Tags

department-of-defense, wired-telecommunications-carriers, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, telecommunications-services, virginia, information-technology, defense-contract-management-agency, peraton-inc

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.7 million to PERATON INC.. 200603!000150!5700!FA8604!ASC/PKW !FA877104D0003 !A!N! !Y!SC05 !01 !20051110!20060930!602938771!602938771!602938771!N!MULTIMAX INC !13665 DULLES TECHNOLOGY DR!HERNDON !VA!20171!86660!057!39!WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB!GREENE !OHIO !+000001178800!N!N!000000000000!D399!OTHER ADP & TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541519!E! !5!B!M!C!A! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PERATON 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 $15.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-11-10. End: 2009-03-27.

What is Peraton Inc.'s track record with large federal telecommunications contracts?

Peraton Inc. has a significant history of performing large-scale federal contracts, particularly within the defense and intelligence sectors. They are known for providing a range of services including network engineering, cybersecurity, and telecommunications infrastructure support. While this specific contract represents a substantial award, Peraton's broader portfolio suggests experience in managing complex projects of similar magnitude. Analyzing their past performance on contracts with the Department of Defense and other agencies, including any reported issues or successes, would provide a more detailed understanding of their capabilities and reliability in delivering critical telecommunications services.

How does the $1.57 billion value compare to similar federal telecommunications contracts?

The $1.57 billion value for this wired telecommunications contract is substantial, placing it among the larger federal procurements in this category. To benchmark its value effectively, comparisons should be made with other long-term, high-value contracts awarded by agencies like the Department of Defense, GSA, or civilian agencies for similar services. Factors such as contract duration, scope of services (e.g., bandwidth, network complexity, geographic coverage), and the specific technologies involved are crucial for a meaningful comparison. Without access to detailed comparative data on pricing structures and service levels of comparable contracts, it's challenging to definitively state whether this represents exceptional value, but its scale indicates a significant investment in critical infrastructure.

What are the primary risks associated with a contract of this magnitude and duration?

Contracts of this magnitude ($1.57 billion) and duration (over 3 years) carry inherent risks. Key risks include potential cost overruns if the firm fixed-price structure doesn't adequately account for unforeseen market fluctuations or technological changes, although the contractor bears most of this risk. There's also the risk of vendor lock-in, making it difficult and costly to switch providers if performance issues arise. Service disruptions due to contractor performance failures, financial instability, or cybersecurity breaches are significant concerns. Furthermore, the long-term nature necessitates continuous monitoring to ensure the services remain aligned with evolving technological needs and agency requirements, and that the contractor maintains a strong security posture.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in ensuring value for taxpayers?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method is designed to maximize competition while allowing for specific, justifiable exclusions. This approach generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. By opening the field to all responsible sources, the government can leverage market forces to secure the best possible value. The 'exclusion of sources' component suggests that certain vendors were intentionally not considered, which requires a clear justification to ensure it doesn't unduly limit competition. When properly implemented, this method strikes a balance between broad market engagement and specific procurement needs, ultimately aiming for cost-effectiveness and optimal service delivery.

What is the historical spending trend for wired telecommunications services within the Department of Defense?

Historical spending by the Department of Defense on wired telecommunications services has been consistently significant, reflecting the critical need for robust and secure communication networks to support global operations. Spending trends are influenced by factors such as technological advancements (e.g., transition to fiber optics, increased bandwidth demands), modernization initiatives, and evolving security requirements. While specific year-over-year figures for this exact contract type are not provided, the overall trend indicates a sustained and substantial investment in telecommunications infrastructure. This particular $1.57 billion contract represents a major allocation within that ongoing spending pattern, underscoring the enduring importance of reliable wired communications for national defense.

Industry Classification

NAICS: InformationWired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite)Wired Telecommunications Carriers

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 18

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: L3harris Technologies, Inc (UEI: 004203337)

Address: 21000 ATLANTIC BLVD STE 300, DULLES, VA, 10

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,697,949

Exercised Options: $15,697,949

Current Obligation: $15,696,749

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA877104D0003

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-11-10

Current End Date: 2009-03-27

Potential End Date: 2009-03-27 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2014-06-04

More Contracts from Peraton Inc.

View all Peraton Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending