Department of Transportation awarded $13.3M to CASE, LLC for professional services, with a 365-day duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,267,824 ($13.3M)

Contractor: Case, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2006-10-31

End Date: 2007-10-31

Contract Duration: 365 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: DTRS57-04-D-30043 TASK ORDER T0004

Place of Performance

Location: CAMBRIDGE, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02142

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $13.3 million to CASE, LLC for work described as: DTRS57-04-D-30043 TASK ORDER T0004 Key points: 1. The contract's value of $13.3 million for a single year suggests a potentially high per-unit cost for the services rendered. 2. As a sole-source award, the lack of competition limits the government's ability to secure the most competitive pricing. 3. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' contract type introduces performance incentives but can also lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. The 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' category is broad, making it difficult to benchmark against specific industry standards without further detail. 5. The contract's duration of one year is relatively short, which may indicate a need for ongoing re-competition or a pilot program. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted to promote small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $13.3 million for a one-year period, falling under a broad 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' NAICS code, makes direct value-for-money assessment challenging without specific service details. Compared to similar sole-source contracts for specialized professional services, the pricing could be considered average to high, especially given the lack of competitive bidding which typically drives down costs. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure, while incentivizing performance, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if performance metrics are not tightly controlled and objectively measured.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This 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 service, or in urgent situations. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery and innovation that typically arises from a competitive bidding process. This can result in higher costs and potentially less optimal solutions compared to a fully competed contract.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there is a reduced likelihood of achieving the lowest possible price for the services. Without competitive pressure, the contractor may not have the same incentive to offer cost savings, potentially leading to a less efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are likely internal offices within the Department of Transportation's Immediate Office of the Secretary, receiving professional, scientific, and technical support. The services delivered are broadly categorized as 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services,' suggesting support functions rather than direct public-facing programs. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, where the Department of Transportation's headquarters are located. Workforce implications may include the direct employment of personnel by CASE, LLC to fulfill the contract requirements, potentially augmenting the government's internal capabilities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition, potentially increasing costs for taxpayers.
Cost Plus Award Fee structure can lead to cost overruns if performance metrics are not rigorously managed.
Broad service category ('All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services') lacks specificity for detailed performance evaluation.
Lack of transparency regarding the justification for sole-source award.
Short contract duration may indicate a need for frequent re-evaluation or potential instability in service provision.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to CASE, LLC, indicating a specific vendor was chosen for their perceived capabilities.
The 'Award Fee' component suggests an attempt to incentivize high performance.
The contract is for professional, scientific, and technical services, which are often critical for agency operations.
The contract has a defined period of performance, allowing for future reassessment of needs and vendor performance.

Sector Analysis

The professional, scientific, and technical services sector is vast and encompasses a wide range of activities supporting government operations. This contract falls under NAICS code 541990, 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services,' which is a catch-all category for services not elsewhere classified. This broad classification makes direct comparison to industry benchmarks difficult. However, government spending in this sector is substantial, with agencies frequently outsourcing specialized expertise to supplement internal capabilities. The market size for such services is significant, driven by the continuous need for analytical, research, and technical support across federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that this award was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a sole-source award, it was not subject to competitive bidding processes that might include small business participation goals. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from this specific award. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests that the primary contractor, CASE, LLC, was selected without specific requirements to engage smaller firms, potentially limiting opportunities within the small business ecosystem for this particular contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Transportation's contracting officers and program managers responsible for the Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation. As a Cost Plus Award Fee contract, performance monitoring and the assessment of award fee criteria would be crucial oversight mechanisms. Transparency regarding the justification for the sole-source award and the performance metrics used for the award fee would be key to accountability. Specific Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on the nature of any potential fraud, waste, or abuse identified within the contract's execution.

Related Government Programs

Department of Transportation - General Services
Professional and Technical Services Contracts
Sole Source Contract Awards
Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole Source Award
Lack of Competition
Broad Service Category
Cost Plus Award Fee Risk

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $13.3 million to CASE, LLC. DTRS57-04-D-30043 TASK ORDER T0004

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CASE, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-10-31. End: 2007-10-31.

What specific services were provided under this contract, and how do they align with the Department of Transportation's mission?

The contract falls under NAICS code 541990, 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services.' This is a very broad category and does not specify the exact services rendered. Typically, such services could include management consulting, research and development support, technical assistance, data analysis, or other specialized expertise. Without further details on the task order itself, it is difficult to definitively link the services to specific DOT mission objectives. However, it is reasonable to infer that these services were intended to support the administrative, operational, or strategic functions of the Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation, potentially aiding in policy development, program management, or internal process improvement.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis instead of through full and open competition?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded as 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which is synonymous with a sole-source award. The specific justification for this determination is not included in the data. Generally, sole-source awards are made when a unique capability is required, only one source is capable of providing the service, or in cases of urgent and compelling need. The Department of Transportation would have had to document and approve this justification, likely citing reasons such as specialized expertise held exclusively by CASE, LLC, or a critical and time-sensitive requirement that precluded a competitive process. Without access to the official justification documentation, the precise rationale remains unknown.

How does the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type typically function, and what are its implications for cost control?

A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract is a type of cost-reimbursement contract where the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a fee that is composed of a fixed base amount and an award amount. The award amount is determined based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. This structure aims to incentivize high performance by offering a potential bonus. However, CPAF contracts can pose challenges for cost control. While costs are reimbursed, the award fee is discretionary and tied to performance. If the performance criteria are not clearly defined, objectively measurable, and rigorously monitored, there is a risk that contractors may receive higher award fees than warranted, or that the focus on achieving award fee targets could inadvertently drive up costs if not managed carefully by the government's contracting officer.

What is the typical spending range for 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' (NAICS 541990) within the Department of Transportation or similar agencies?

Spending within the broad NAICS code 541990 can vary significantly due to its encompassing nature. For the Department of Transportation, and agencies with similar administrative and operational support needs, contracts under this category can range from tens of thousands to millions of dollars annually. Benchmarking this specific $13.3 million contract requires more granular data on the specific services procured. However, for a one-year duration, this amount suggests a substantial engagement, likely involving a dedicated team or significant project scope. Comparable agencies often utilize such contracts for strategic planning, policy analysis, or specialized technical consulting, with annual spending in this category often representing a notable portion of an agency's operational budget.

What is the track record of CASE, LLC in performing government contracts, particularly those of similar size and scope?

Information regarding the specific track record of CASE, LLC in performing government contracts of similar size and scope to this $13.3 million award is not available within the provided data. To assess their performance history, one would typically need to consult government contract databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) to review past awards, contract types, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or terminations. Without this external data, it's impossible to evaluate CASE, LLC's past performance, reliability, or expertise in delivering services comparable to those required under DTRS57-04-D-30043 TASK ORDER T0004.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Chenega Corporation (UEI: 622692994)

Address: 645 CHURCH STREET, NORFOLK, VA, 23510

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,917,824

Exercised Options: $13,917,824

Current Obligation: $13,267,824

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTRS5704D30043

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline