Department of Defense contract for professional services awarded at $30.19M, utilizing a non-competitive process

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,185,960 ($30.2M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-01-10

End Date: 2016-07-09

Contract Duration: 546 days

Daily Burn Rate: $55.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $30.2 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF Key points: 1. The contract's value of over $30 million for "All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services" warrants scrutiny regarding necessity and scope. 2. A non-competitive award suggests potential limitations in market research or a specific justification for excluding other vendors. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type offers cost certainty but may not fully capture efficiencies if the scope was not precisely defined. 4. The contract duration of 546 days (approximately 1.5 years) indicates a medium-term engagement for the services provided. 5. The lack of disclosed domestic awardees raises questions about transparency and the potential for broader economic impact. 6. The absence of small business set-aside provisions or reported subcontracting may limit opportunities for smaller firms in this engagement.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $30.19 million contract is challenging without specific details on the services rendered. However, for 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services,' this represents a significant investment. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost predictability for the government, but the absence of competition makes it difficult to assess if the pricing is truly competitive or represents fair market value. Without comparable contracts or detailed service breakdowns, a definitive value-for-money assessment is limited.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a 'NOT COMPETED' method, indicating a sole-source or limited competition scenario. The specific justification for this approach is not provided, but it typically arises when only one vendor possesses the required capabilities, or in urgent situations. The lack of open competition means that potential cost savings and innovative solutions from a wider pool of bidders were not explored, potentially leading to a higher price than might be achieved through a competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can mean taxpayers may not be getting the best possible price or value, as the government did not leverage market competition to drive down costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the undisclosed domestic awardees who received a substantial contract award. The services delivered fall under 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services,' which could encompass a wide range of support functions for the Department of the Army. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, given the 'DOMESTIC AWARDEES' designation, but specific locations are not detailed. Workforce implications would involve the employment of professionals and technical staff by the awarded contractor(s) to fulfill the contract requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and limited vendor options.
Undisclosed awardees reduce transparency and make it difficult to assess contractor performance or past issues.
The broad category of 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' can sometimes mask less defined scopes of work, increasing risk.
No indication of small business participation suggests missed opportunities for economic inclusion.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for the Department of the Army.
Awarding to domestic entities supports the U.S. economy.
The contract duration suggests a sustained need for the services, implying strategic importance.

Sector Analysis

The professional, scientific, and technical services sector is a significant component of federal contracting. This contract, categorized under NAICS code 541990 ('All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services'), represents a portion of the government's spending on specialized expertise. The market for such services is diverse, ranging from research and development support to management consulting and technical assistance. Federal spending in this area often supports agency missions that require specialized knowledge not readily available in-house. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without a more precise definition of the services, but the $30 million figure indicates a substantial engagement.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have been specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there any indication of subcontracting plans. The award to 'DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' means that opportunities for small businesses to participate as prime contractors or subcontractors were likely limited or non-existent for this specific procurement. This could represent a missed opportunity to foster small business growth and innovation within the federal contracting ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight. The Inspector General for the Department of Defense may also conduct audits or investigations if specific concerns arise regarding performance, cost, or compliance. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature and undisclosed awardees, making external oversight more challenging.

Related Government Programs

Professional and Technical Services Contracts
Department of the Army Service Contracts
Non-Competitive Federal Procurements
All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Risk Flags

Non-competitive award
Undisclosed awardees
Broad service category (NAICS 541990)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $30.2 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). IGF::CT::IGF

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 $30.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-01-10. End: 2016-07-09.

What specific services were procured under this $30.19 million contract?

The contract falls under the NAICS code 541990, 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services.' This is a broad category that can encompass a wide array of activities, including but not limited to research, development, consulting, testing, and technical support. Without further details from the contract award documentation (which are not fully provided here), it is impossible to specify the exact services rendered. The Department of the Army would have a more detailed statement of work (SOW) outlining the precise requirements, deliverables, and performance standards associated with this $30.19 million obligation.

Why was this contract awarded on a non-competitive basis?

The data indicates the contract was awarded using the 'NOT COMPETED' method. Federal procurement regulations allow for non-competitive awards under specific circumstances, such as when only one responsible source can satisfy the agency's needs, in cases of urgent and compelling need, or when it is not in the public interest to compete the requirement. The Department of the Army would have documented a justification for other than full and open competition (JOFOC) to support this decision. Common reasons include proprietary technology, unique capabilities, or a critical need that cannot be met through a competitive process within the required timeframe.

What is the typical cost range for similar 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' contracts awarded by the Department of Defense?

The cost range for contracts under NAICS 541990 can vary dramatically due to the broad nature of the services. Contracts can range from tens of thousands to hundreds of millions of dollars. A $30.19 million contract for these services is substantial but not unprecedented for a medium-term engagement (546 days). To establish a true benchmark, one would need to compare it against contracts with similar scopes of work, durations, and complexity. Without that granular detail, this figure represents a significant investment in specialized support services for the Department of the Army.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude?

Sole-source awards, especially for significant amounts like $30.19 million, carry several risks. Firstly, the government may not achieve the best possible price due to the lack of competition, potentially leading to overspending. Secondly, the absence of multiple bidders can limit the range of innovative solutions or approaches that might have been presented. Thirdly, there's a risk of vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes dependent on a single provider. Finally, reduced transparency can obscure potential performance issues or conflicts of interest that might be more readily identified in a competitive environment.

How does the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type impact the value and risk for this procurement?

A Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract type is generally preferred by the government as it shifts the majority of the cost risk to the contractor. This means the contractor is obligated to complete the work for a predetermined price, regardless of their actual costs. For the government, this provides budget certainty. However, the value derived from an FFP contract is highly dependent on the accuracy and completeness of the initial scope of work. If the scope was poorly defined, the contractor might deliver minimal effort for the fixed price, or conversely, if the scope was overly restrictive, it could stifle innovation. The risk for the contractor is that unforeseen cost increases could reduce their profit margin.

What does the lack of disclosed awardees imply for accountability and performance monitoring?

The designation 'DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' significantly hampers accountability and performance monitoring. Without knowing the specific entity or entities awarded the contract, it is impossible to review their past performance records, check for any debarments or sanctions, or assess their capacity to deliver. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for oversight bodies, including the public and potentially the agency itself, to hold the contractor accountable for meeting the contract's objectives, quality standards, and delivery timelines. It also complicates efforts to identify systemic issues or best practices.

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 COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

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

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,185,960

Exercised Options: $30,185,960

Current Obligation: $30,185,960

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline