VA's $11.8M Financial Management System Support Contract Awarded to Delta Solutions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,800,015 ($11.8M)

Contractor: Delta Solutions and Technologies, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Start Date: 2006-06-15

End Date: 2011-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,903 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.2K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: SUPPORT FOR THE VA FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20420, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Veterans Affairs obligated $11.8 million to DELTA SOLUTIONS AND TECHNOLOGIES, INC. for work described as: SUPPORT FOR THE VA FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Key points: 1. Contract focused on essential financial management system support for the VA. 2. Awarded through a competitive process, indicating potential for price discovery. 3. Duration of over 5 years suggests a long-term need for these services. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government. 5. Performance occurred primarily in the District of Columbia. 6. No explicit small business set-aside, but subcontracting opportunities may exist.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $11.8 million for support of the VA Financial Management System appears reasonable given the 5-year duration. Benchmarking against similar IT support contracts for large federal agencies suggests that costs for specialized system maintenance and support can range significantly, but this figure falls within a typical band for such services. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost predictability, which is a positive indicator for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that multiple vendors likely had the opportunity to bid. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, a competitive process generally ensures that the government receives a fair price and that the chosen vendor offers a strong technical solution.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by fostering price negotiation and selecting the best value offer.

Public Impact

Beneficiaries include Department of Veterans Affairs personnel relying on the financial management system. Services delivered include crucial support for the VA's financial operations. Geographic impact is centered in the District of Columbia, where the VA's headquarters and key administrative functions are located. Workforce implications include support roles for IT professionals and financial system administrators.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in if specialized knowledge is not adequately transferred.
Reliance on a single vendor for critical financial system support could pose continuity risks.
Scope creep could increase costs beyond the initial $11.8M if not managed tightly.

Positive Signals

Competitive award process suggests a focus on best value and fair pricing.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty.
Long-term support contract indicates a stable and ongoing need, potentially leading to efficient operations.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT services sector, specifically focusing on enterprise resource planning (ERP) and financial management systems. The market for such specialized IT support is robust, with numerous large and small businesses offering these capabilities. The VA's spending on financial systems is part of a broader government trend towards modernizing and maintaining critical IT infrastructure to ensure efficient operations and data integrity.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this was not a small business set-aside contract. While Delta Solutions and Technologies, Inc. may be a small business, the contract itself was competed broadly. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans, but for a contract of this nature and value, it is possible that small businesses could be involved in providing specialized support or services.

Oversight & Accountability

As a competitive delivery order, the contract likely underwent standard procurement oversight processes within the VA. Accountability is managed through the firm fixed-price terms and performance expectations outlined in the contract. Transparency is generally maintained through federal procurement databases like FPDS. Inspector General oversight would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

VA Financial Management Modernization Program
Federal Financial Management Systems
IT Support Services Contracts
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems Support

Risk Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in
Reliance on single vendor for critical system
Scope creep risk
System obsolescence risk

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Veterans Affairs awarded $11.8 million to DELTA SOLUTIONS AND TECHNOLOGIES, INC.. SUPPORT FOR THE VA FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DELTA SOLUTIONS AND TECHNOLOGIES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (Department of Veterans Affairs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-06-15. End: 2011-08-31.

What is the track record of Delta Solutions and Technologies, Inc. in supporting federal financial management systems?

Delta Solutions and Technologies, Inc. has a history of providing IT services to the federal government. Their involvement in supporting the VA Financial Management System from 2006 to 2011 indicates experience with large-scale federal financial systems. Further analysis would require examining their performance on this and other contracts, including any past performance evaluations, awards, or disputes. Understanding their specific expertise in financial systems, particularly within the VA's complex environment, is crucial for assessing their capability. Their ability to maintain and enhance such a critical system suggests a level of technical proficiency and understanding of government financial regulations and reporting requirements.

How does the $11.8 million cost compare to similar IT support contracts for federal financial systems?

The $11.8 million cost over approximately five years for supporting the VA Financial Management System is within a reasonable range for large federal IT support contracts. Benchmarking requires comparing it to contracts with similar scope, duration, and complexity. For instance, contracts supporting ERP systems or core financial platforms for agencies like the Department of Defense or HHS can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars annually. Factors influencing cost include the number of users, system criticality, required service levels, and the specific modules or functionalities supported. Given the firm fixed-price nature, this award suggests the VA aimed for cost certainty, and the competitive process likely contributed to achieving a fair market price for the services rendered.

What were the primary risks associated with this contract, and how were they managed?

Key risks for this contract likely included technical obsolescence of the financial system, potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price scope was not well-defined, and vendor performance issues. Technical risks might involve the system's ability to adapt to changing federal accounting standards or cybersecurity threats. Cost risks are inherent in fixed-price contracts if requirements change or unforeseen technical challenges arise. Vendor performance risks include delays, quality issues, or failure to meet service level agreements. Management of these risks would typically involve robust contract oversight, clear performance metrics, regular progress reviews, change control processes, and potentially contingency planning for critical system failures or vendor non-performance.

How effective was the VA Financial Management System during the period this contract was active?

Assessing the effectiveness of the VA Financial Management System (FMS) during this contract period (2006-2011) requires examining VA's internal performance reports, audit findings, and potentially Inspector General reports from that era. Generally, FMS are critical for accurate financial reporting, budget execution, and accountability. Their effectiveness is measured by factors such as data integrity, system uptime, user satisfaction, compliance with federal financial regulations (e.g., CFO Act), and the ability to support decision-making. Without specific performance data from the VA for this period, it's difficult to provide a definitive assessment, but the renewal or continuation of support contracts suggests the system remained operational and necessary for the VA's functions.

What were the historical spending patterns for supporting the VA Financial Management System prior to and after this contract?

To analyze historical spending patterns, one would need to examine the VA's budget allocations and contract awards related to its financial management systems over an extended period. This $11.8 million contract represents a specific investment during its active period. Understanding prior spending would involve looking at contracts for the system's initial development or earlier support phases. Post-contract spending would reveal the VA's ongoing investment in maintaining or upgrading its financial systems. Significant shifts in spending could indicate system modernization efforts, changes in operational needs, or evolving federal financial management requirements. A trend analysis of total contract obligations for FMS support would provide context on the VA's long-term commitment and resource allocation to this critical function.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Business Support Services › Credit Bureaus

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 13800 COPPERMINE RD, HERNDON, VA, 20171

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,061,128

Exercised Options: $11,800,015

Current Obligation: $11,800,015

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0013J

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline