DoD's $23.4M NTCSS Support Services contract awarded to CACI-ISS, LLC, with 2 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,370,358 ($23.4M)

Contractor: Caci-Iss, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-05-06

End Date: 2015-09-30

Contract Duration: 877 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: LOT I - BASE YEAR - NTCSS SUPPORT SVC

Place of Performance

Location: CHANTILLY, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20151

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.4 million to CACI-ISS, LLC for work described as: LOT I - BASE YEAR - NTCSS SUPPORT SVC Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 2. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can lead to cost overruns if not managed closely. 3. Performance period of 877 days indicates a medium-term service requirement. 4. The award was a delivery order under a larger contract, implying a phased approach to service delivery. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 517110 points to telecommunications services. 6. The contract was awarded to CACI-ISS, LLC, a known entity in the federal contracting space.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $23,370,357.56 for NTCSS Support Services over approximately 2.4 years appears to be within a reasonable range for IT support services of this nature. However, without specific details on the scope of services and labor categories, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces inherent risk for cost escalation, which needs careful monitoring by the agency to ensure fair pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. With two bidders, the competition level was moderate. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of bidders typically drives prices down more effectively. The agency's decision to use full and open competition is a positive step towards achieving competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition with two bidders suggests that taxpayers likely benefited from a more competitive price than a sole-source award, though further competition could have potentially yielded greater savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy, receiving essential NTCSS support services. Services delivered likely include network operations, maintenance, and technical support for the Navy's telecommunications infrastructure. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of the Navy's operational areas, potentially worldwide. Workforce implications include employment for CACI-ISS, LLC personnel specializing in telecommunications and IT support.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

CPFF contract type can incentivize contractor to increase costs to increase fee.
Limited competition (2 bidders) may not have resulted in the lowest possible price.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess service quality and efficiency.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, promoting a fair marketplace.
Contractor CACI-ISS, LLC has a significant presence and experience in federal IT services.
The contract is for essential support services, indicating a critical need being met.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT and Telecommunications sector, specifically supporting wired telecommunications carriers. The federal government is a major consumer of such services, with significant annual spending on network infrastructure, maintenance, and support. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale telecommunications support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense and other federal agencies to similar-sized contractors.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the prime contractor, CACI-ISS, LLC, is a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. This suggests that the primary impact on the small business ecosystem would be indirect, through potential competition for future subcontracts or by large businesses like CACI-ISS, LLC potentially partnering with small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS-NG. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

NTCSS Program
Navy Information Technology Support Contracts
Telecommunications Infrastructure Services
Department of Defense IT Services

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
Moderate competition level (2 bidders)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.4 million to CACI-ISS, LLC. LOT I - BASE YEAR - NTCSS SUPPORT SVC

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CACI-ISS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-05-06. End: 2015-09-30.

What is the specific scope of "NTCSS Support Services" and how does it align with the NAICS code 517110?

NTCSS typically refers to the Navy Continuous Training System. Support services under NAICS code 517110 (Wired Telecommunications Carriers) would likely encompass the maintenance, operation, and enhancement of the underlying telecommunications infrastructure that enables the NTCSS. This could include network cabling, data transmission services, voice communication systems, and related hardware/software support necessary for the continuous operation of training simulations and systems. The specific services would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), outlining tasks such as network monitoring, troubleshooting, equipment installation, and potentially cybersecurity measures for the network infrastructure supporting the training environment.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type compare to other contract types for IT support services in terms of cost control?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts reimburse the contractor for allowable costs incurred plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While this type can be useful when the scope of work is not well-defined or is expected to change, it carries a higher risk of cost overruns compared to fixed-price contracts. Contractors have less incentive to control costs because their fee is fixed regardless of the total cost. In contrast, Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts offer the greatest cost certainty for the government, as the price is set upfront. Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF) contracts offer a middle ground, incentivizing cost savings through shared cost reductions. For IT support services where scope can be relatively predictable, FFP or CPIF might offer better cost control than CPFF.

What is CACI-ISS, LLC's track record with similar Department of Defense IT support contracts?

CACI-ISS, LLC, a subsidiary of CACI International Inc., has a substantial track record of performing IT and support services for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. They are frequently awarded contracts for network operations, systems integration, cybersecurity, and enterprise IT support. Reviewing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those involving telecommunications infrastructure and training systems support, would provide insight into their ability to meet performance requirements, manage costs, and deliver quality services. Data from contract databases often shows a pattern of successful contract completions, though specific performance ratings and any past issues would require deeper investigation.

Given the $23.4M award value, what is a reasonable benchmark for the number of personnel or labor hours expected for this type of service?

Estimating personnel or labor hours solely from the award value is challenging without knowing the specific labor mix (e.g., senior engineers vs. technicians), overhead rates, and the exact duration of service. However, for a $23.4 million contract over approximately 877 days (2.4 years), assuming an average loaded labor rate of $150-$200 per hour (which includes salary, benefits, overhead, and profit), this could translate to roughly 117,000 to 156,000 labor hours. This might support a team of 20-40 full-time equivalent personnel, depending on the skill levels and the intensity of the support required. A more precise benchmark would require detailed analysis of the contract's labor categories and rates.

What are the potential risks associated with a "delivery order" award versus a direct contract award?

A delivery order is typically issued under a previously awarded indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) or other type of basic contract. The primary risk with a delivery order, compared to a direct contract award for the full scope, is that the overall scope and funding might not be fully defined or obligated upfront. This can lead to potential scope creep if not managed carefully, or conversely, fragmentation of services if multiple delivery orders are issued for related but distinct tasks. For the government, it offers flexibility in phasing requirements and funding. For the contractor, it means work is awarded incrementally, which can impact resource planning. The risk is generally managed through clear task orders and adherence to the terms of the basic contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite) › Wired Telecommunications Carriers

Product/Service Code: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT (INCLD FIRMWARE) SOFTWARE,SUPPLIES& SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: CACI International Inc (UEI: 045534641)

Address: 14370 NEWBROOK DRIVE, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,458,722

Exercised Options: $38,458,722

Current Obligation: $23,370,358

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 3

Total Subaward Amount: $912,000

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W91QUZ06D0020

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline