DoD's $35M IT support contract awarded without competition, raising value-for-money questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,172,985 ($35.2M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-12-22

End Date: 2013-10-29

Contract Duration: 1,042 days

Daily Burn Rate: $33.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE 401ST AFSB

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $35.2 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE 401ST AFSB Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a non-competitive basis, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs. 2. The duration of the contract (1042 days) suggests a need for stable, long-term IT support. 3. The Computer Facilities Management Services (NAICS 541513) category indicates a focus on infrastructure and operational IT support. 4. The absence of disclosed domestic awardees makes direct benchmarking difficult. 5. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed. 6. The total obligated amount of $33.7M over its life suggests a significant investment in IT infrastructure.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value is difficult to assess due to the lack of disclosed awardees and competitive bidding. Awarding a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract without competition inherently carries a higher risk of inflated costs compared to fixed-price contracts or those with robust competition. Benchmarking against similar IT support services contracts within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would be necessary to determine if the pricing is reasonable, but this data is not readily available.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' (NAF) status, indicating that a full and open competition was not conducted. The specific justifications for this sole-source award are not provided, but typically such awards are made when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no competitive pressure to drive down prices or encourage innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit the government's ability to secure the best possible price, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers. Without competition, there's less incentive for the contractor to offer cost savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the 401st AFSB (Air Force Sustainment Center), receiving essential IT support services. The services delivered include computer facilities management, crucial for the operational readiness of the unit. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the facilities managed by the 401st AFSB. The contract supports IT personnel, potentially including both government employees and contractor staff, ensuring the smooth functioning of IT systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and suboptimal service delivery.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type increases risk of cost overruns without strong oversight.
Undisclosed domestic awardees hinder transparency and external performance evaluation.
Contract duration without clear performance metrics could lead to complacency.

Positive Signals

The contract addresses a critical need for IT support, essential for military operations.
The award was made to a domestic entity, supporting the U.S. economy.
The contract duration suggests a stable, ongoing requirement for IT services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology sector, specifically focusing on IT infrastructure and facilities management. The market for IT support services is vast and highly competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized services. However, for specific government requirements, especially those deemed mission-critical or requiring unique clearances, the competitive landscape can narrow significantly. The annual spending on IT services by the federal government is in the tens of billions, making this contract a relatively small portion of the overall IT expenditure.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not available for this contract. Given the sole-source nature of the award, it is less likely that small business participation was a primary consideration during the procurement process, unless the sole source itself was a small business. Further investigation into the contractor's size and subcontracting history would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract awarded by the Department of the Army, it would typically fall under the purview of the agency's contracting officer and potentially an Inspector General's office. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive award and undisclosed contractor. Accountability would hinge on the contract's performance metrics and reporting requirements, which are not specified.

Related Government Programs

IT Infrastructure Support Services
Computer Facilities Management
Department of Defense IT Contracts
Air Force Sustainment Center Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus contract type
Lack of disclosed awardee
Potential for cost overruns

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $35.2 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE 401ST AFSB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $35.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-12-22. End: 2013-10-29.

What was the specific justification for awarding this IT support contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded under 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' (NAF), which is a designation for sole-source procurements. The specific justification, such as a lack of available sources, urgency, or unique capabilities, is not detailed in the summary information. Typically, agencies must document and justify sole-source awards to ensure they are made appropriately and in the government's best interest. Without this documentation, it is impossible to fully assess the necessity of bypassing full and open competition.

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

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are generally considered less cost-efficient for the government compared to fixed-price contracts. In a CPFF arrangement, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This structure incentivizes the contractor to incur costs, as their fee remains constant regardless of the total cost. While CPFF contracts can be useful for research and development or when the scope of work is uncertain, they carry a higher risk of cost overruns and require robust government oversight to manage expenses effectively. For routine IT support services, fixed-price or performance-based contracts often offer better value and cost certainty for taxpayers.

What is the typical market rate or benchmark for Computer Facilities Management Services (NAICS 541513) of this scale?

Benchmarking the specific cost per unit or overall value for Computer Facilities Management Services (NAICS 541513) is challenging without more granular data on the services provided, the number of users supported, and the specific technologies managed. However, the federal government spends billions annually on IT services. Industry reports and government spending databases (like FPDS) can provide ranges for similar services. Given this contract's total obligated amount of approximately $33.7 million over roughly three years, it represents a significant but not extraordinary investment for a large military unit's IT infrastructure. Without knowing the exact scope and deliverables, a precise benchmark is difficult, but the non-competitive nature raises concerns about whether this rate is optimal.

What performance metrics or oversight mechanisms were in place for this contract?

The provided data does not specify the performance metrics or oversight mechanisms employed for this contract. For a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, particularly one awarded non-competitively, rigorous oversight is crucial to control costs and ensure satisfactory performance. This would typically involve detailed reporting requirements, regular performance reviews, and potentially the use of contract performance metrics (CPMs) or contractor performance assessment reporting (CPARs). The absence of this information limits the ability to assess the contractor's accountability and the overall effectiveness of the IT support provided.

Has the 401st AFSB or the Department of the Army utilized similar IT support contracts in the past, and how does this one compare?

Historical spending data for the 401st AFSB or the Department of the Army on IT support services would be necessary for a comparative analysis. However, it is common for military units and large government agencies to contract for extensive IT support. The key comparison points would be the contract type, duration, total value, and whether previous awards were competitively sourced. If past contracts for similar services were competitively awarded at a lower cost or with better performance outcomes, it would further highlight potential concerns with this sole-source CPFF award. Without access to that historical context, it's difficult to definitively state how this contract compares.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $35,172,985

Exercised Options: $35,172,985

Current Obligation: $35,172,985

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline