Leidos Inc. awarded $66.7M for professional development training, a sole-source contract with a high per-unit cost
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $66,715,759 ($66.7M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2016-01-01
End Date: 2018-11-30
Contract Duration: 1,064 days
Daily Burn Rate: $62.7K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF ITRSS
Place of Performance
Location: FORT BELVOIR, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22060
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $66.7 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF ITRSS Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting competitive pricing benefits. 2. High per-unit cost suggests potential for overspending or specialized service needs. 3. Contract duration of 1064 days indicates a long-term commitment to these services. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty but may not capture efficiencies. 5. The contract falls under the Professional and Management Development Training NAICS code. 6. Awarded by the Department of the Army, indicating a focus on military personnel development.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The total award of $66.7 million for professional development training appears high, especially considering the sole-source nature of the award. Benchmarking against similar contracts is difficult without more specific service details, but the reported per-unit cost of $62,703 is significantly above typical training program costs. This suggests either a highly specialized or comprehensive training package, or a potential lack of cost-effectiveness due to limited competition. Further analysis of the specific training modules and their necessity would be required to fully assess value.
Cost Per Unit: $62,703 per unit
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This typically occurs when only one vendor possesses the unique capabilities or qualifications required for the service, or in situations where urgency or specific circumstances preclude a competitive process. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery and potential cost savings that a competitive bidding process usually provides.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these services due to the absence of competitive pressure to lower prices. The government's ability to negotiate the best possible price was likely constrained.
Public Impact
Military personnel within the Department of the Army are the primary beneficiaries of this training. Services delivered include professional and management development, aimed at enhancing leadership and operational skills. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the Army's operational areas, potentially nationwide or global. Workforce implications include upskilling and professional advancement for Army personnel.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price competition and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
- High per-unit cost warrants scrutiny to ensure value for money.
- Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
- Contract duration may lock in potentially suboptimal pricing for an extended period.
Positive Signals
- Contract awarded to a known entity (Leidos, Inc.) which may have a track record with the agency.
- Firm Fixed Price contract provides budget certainty for the agency.
- The training is intended to improve professional and management skills, which can benefit military effectiveness.
Sector Analysis
The professional and management development training sector is a significant component of government contracting, supporting workforce development across various agencies. This contract, valued at $66.7 million, represents a substantial investment within this sector. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without detailed service breakdowns, but large-scale, long-term training initiatives for federal agencies often run into tens of millions of dollars. The market for such services includes a mix of large prime contractors and specialized training providers.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, the prime contractor, Leidos, Inc., is a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear, but it is unlikely to have benefited from direct set-aside opportunities on this particular award.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) responsible for monitoring performance and ensuring compliance with contract terms. The Department of the Army's internal audit and oversight functions would also play a role. Transparency regarding the justification for the sole-source award and the specific deliverables would be key to assessing accountability. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Military Personnel Training Programs
- Professional Development Services
- Management Training Contracts
- Department of Defense Education and Training
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- High per-unit cost
- Lack of competition justification
Tags
defense, department-of-the-army, leidos-inc, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, professional-development-training, management-development-training, sole-source, virginia, large-business, training-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $66.7 million to LEIDOS, INC.. IGF::CT::IGF ITRSS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $66.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2016-01-01. End: 2018-11-30.
What specific professional and management development training was provided under this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 611430, 'Professional and Management Development Training.' However, it does not detail the specific curriculum, modules, or skill areas covered. This could range from leadership and management courses for officers and NCOs to specialized technical training for civilian staff. Understanding the precise nature of the training is crucial for assessing its relevance, effectiveness, and the justification for the high per-unit cost. Without this granular detail, it's difficult to determine if the training directly addresses critical skill gaps or supports evolving military operational requirements.
What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
Sole-source awards are typically justified when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services. For this contract, potential justifications could include unique proprietary training developed by Leidos, highly specialized expertise only Leidos possesses, or an urgent need where competition was not feasible. The specific justification document, often referred to as a Justification and Approval (J&A) for Other Than Full and Open Competition, would contain the detailed rationale. Without access to this document, it is impossible to definitively assess the validity of the sole-source determination and whether it truly served the government's best interest or was a missed opportunity for competition.
How does the per-unit cost of $62,703 compare to industry benchmarks for similar training?
The per-unit cost of $62,703 is exceptionally high when compared to typical benchmarks for professional and management development training. Standard leadership courses, project management certifications, or even specialized technical training programs often cost significantly less per participant, especially when procured through competitive means. This high figure suggests that the 'unit' might represent a very comprehensive package, a long-duration program, or a highly specialized niche service. It is essential to understand what constitutes a 'unit' in this context – is it a single course, a full degree program, or a set of services for one individual over a period? Without this clarification, a direct comparison is difficult, but the figure alone raises concerns about potential overpricing or a lack of cost-efficiency.
What is Leidos, Inc.'s track record with the Department of the Army for similar training contracts?
Leidos, Inc. is a large government contractor with a significant presence across various federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of the Army. While this specific data point doesn't detail their history, Leidos has a broad portfolio encompassing IT, systems engineering, and professional services. Their track record with the Army likely includes numerous contracts, potentially including training and development services. A deeper dive into contract databases and performance reviews would be necessary to assess their specific performance history related to professional and management development training, including past successes, challenges, and any quality or cost issues encountered on prior Army contracts.
What were the performance outcomes or effectiveness metrics for this training contract?
The provided data does not include information on the performance outcomes or effectiveness metrics of the training delivered under this contract. Typically, government contracts include requirements for measuring success, such as participant satisfaction surveys, pre- and post-training assessments of knowledge or skill acquisition, or tracking the application of learned skills in the workplace. Without these metrics, it is challenging to evaluate whether the $66.7 million investment yielded the intended benefits for the Department of the Army's personnel and operational readiness. Post-award performance reports or program reviews would be the source for this information.
How has spending on professional and management development training by the Department of the Army trended over the past five years?
This specific data point only provides information for one contract award. To analyze spending trends, one would need to aggregate data for all professional and management development training contracts awarded by the Department of the Army over a specified period, such as the last five fiscal years. This would involve querying contract databases for relevant NAICS codes (like 611430) and contract types. Such an analysis could reveal whether spending in this category has increased, decreased, or remained relatively stable, and identify any significant shifts in contracting strategies or major program investments.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Educational Services › Business Schools and Computer and Management Training › Professional and Management Development Training
Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Solicitation ID: W911W416R0003
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Address: 700 N FREDERICK AVE, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20879
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $66,715,795
Exercised Options: $66,715,795
Current Obligation: $66,715,759
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 1
Total Subaward Amount: $332,341
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2016-01-01
Current End Date: 2018-11-30
Potential End Date: 2018-11-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-12-31
More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.
- Science Operation and Maintenance Support for the United States Antarctic Program — $3.1B (National Science Foundation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Department of Transportation)
- THE Facilities Development and Operations Contract(fdoc) Specifies Technical, Managerial, and Adminstrative Work Needed to Ensure the Availablitity, Integrity, and Reliability of Missionoperations Facilites Supporting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa) Human Space Flight (HSF) Programs Requiring Mission Operations Support. the Objective of This Contract IS to Consolidate Efforts Across the Facilities Covered Under Fodoc in Order to Maximize Synergy for Hardware and Software Development, Modification, Sustaining. Maintenance, Reconfiguration, and Operations for the Purpose of Reducing Cost Without Compromising Facility Functionality and Performance. Nasa Will Collaborate With the Contractor on Developing Procedural and Technical Innovations That Improve Quality, Ensure Customer Satisfaction and Reduce Cost. Mission Operations Facilities Currently Support the Space Shuttle Programand the International Space Station Progra, Including International Partner and Commmercial Visiting Vehicles. Mission Operations Facilities Supporting the Cnstellation Program(cxp) ARE Continuously Under Development in Concert With CXP Formulation and Implementation. Fdoc Applies to the Facilities of These Three Programs, and ANY Other HSF Program Requiring Mission Operations Facility Support. in Addition, Future Mission Operations Facilities and Capabilities ARE Within the Technical Scope of This SOW, and Fdoc Worlk Associated With These Facilities Will BE Enabled Through Idiq — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Airspace System (NAS) Implementation Support Contract (nisc). Provides Engineering and Technical Support Services to FAA Organizations Responsible for NAS Transformation, Integration and Implementation in the Areas of Implementation and Integration Planning, Transition Planning, Engineering Support, Environmental Support, Automation Support and Other Engineering and Technical Disciplines AS Required. TAS::69 8107::TAS — $1.1B (Department of Transportation)
- Itssc Task Order for Systems — $1.1B (Social Security Administration)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)