DoD's $23.8M logistics consulting contract with SAWTST LLC shows fair value despite limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,780,133 ($23.8M)

Contractor: Sawtst LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2017-09-15

End Date: 2022-12-29

Contract Duration: 1,931 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 19

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF FORSCOM COMET SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: FORT BRAGG, CUMBERLAND County, NORTH CAROLINA, 28310

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.8 million to SAWTST LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF FORSCOM COMET SUPPORT Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar services, though a precise comparison is hindered by the unique nature of the support. 2. Competition was limited, raising questions about potential price discovery and whether the government secured the best possible pricing. 3. The contract's duration and fixed-price nature suggest a degree of cost control, but the absence of small business set-asides is noted. 4. Performance context is difficult to ascertain without specific metrics, but the service category points to operational efficiency improvements. 5. This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically logistics consulting, a common area for federal procurement. 6. The definitive contract award mechanism indicates a flexible arrangement for ongoing needs. 7. The contract's total value over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in optimizing military logistics.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this contract is challenging due to the specialized nature of FORSCOM COMET support. However, the total value of approximately $23.8 million over nearly five years, averaging around $4.76 million annually, appears within a reasonable range for complex logistics consulting services. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if performance was met. Without more granular data on deliverables and specific outcomes, a definitive assessment of 'excellent' value is not possible, but it does not appear to be excessively priced.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while the initial intent was full and open competition, certain sources were excluded, leading to a limited pool of bidders. The data shows 19 bids were received, which is a healthy number and suggests significant interest. However, the exclusion of specific sources could potentially limit the breadth of competition and impact price negotiation. The number of bidders is sufficient to provide a competitive baseline, but the exclusion mechanism warrants further scrutiny to ensure fairness and optimal pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The level of competition, while receiving 19 bids, was constrained by source exclusions. This means taxpayers may not have benefited from the widest possible array of offers, potentially leading to a higher-than-optimal price. However, 19 bids still provide a reasonable basis for price comparison.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM) units, which receive enhanced logistics support and process optimization. The services delivered aim to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of military logistics operations, potentially impacting readiness and deployment capabilities. The geographic impact is primarily within the continental United States where FORSCOM units are based, though the improvements could have global implications for military operations. The contract supports a specialized area of consulting, likely involving a small team of highly skilled professionals, with minimal direct impact on a broad workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition due to exclusion of sources could have impacted price discovery.
Lack of small business participation means potential missed opportunities for smaller, specialized firms.
The long contract duration (1931 days) might reduce flexibility for adapting to changing logistical needs.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
A substantial number of bids (19) were received, indicating market interest.
The contract supports a critical function: military logistics optimization.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on logistics consulting. The market for logistics consulting is substantial, driven by the need for efficiency and cost savings across various industries, including government. Federal spending in this area is consistent, as agencies continually seek to optimize supply chains and operational processes. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to pinpoint precisely due to the specialized nature of military logistics support, but the annual value of this contract is moderate within the broader federal consulting landscape.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the data indicates no small business participation (sb: false). This suggests that the requirement was likely perceived as needing large-scale capabilities or that the solicitation did not include specific provisions to encourage small business involvement. Consequently, there are missed opportunities for small businesses to contribute to this critical logistics support and for the government to leverage specialized small business expertise. Subcontracting implications are unknown without further detail, but typically, prime contractors may engage small businesses, though it's not guaranteed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The definitive contract structure may allow for modifications and task orders, each requiring appropriate review. Transparency is facilitated by contract databases like FPDS, which provide basic award information. Accountability rests with the contractor to meet performance requirements and the agency to monitor progress and ensure compliance. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

DoD Logistics Modernization Programs
Army Operational Support Services
Federal Supply Chain Management Consulting
Military Readiness Support Contracts
Defense Process Improvement Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Lack of small business participation.
Potential for scope creep in long-term consulting contracts.
Need for clear performance metrics to assess value.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.8 million to SAWTST LLC. IGF::OT::IGF FORSCOM COMET SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SAWTST LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-09-15. End: 2022-12-29.

What specific logistics challenges was SAWTST LLC contracted to address for FORSCOM?

The contract, identified as 'IGF::OT::IGF FORSCOM COMET SUPPORT,' suggests SAWTST LLC was engaged to provide consulting services related to the optimization and improvement of logistics processes for the U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM). While the specific 'COMET' initiative is not detailed in the provided data, such contracts typically involve analyzing existing supply chains, distribution networks, inventory management, and transportation strategies. The goal is usually to identify inefficiencies, reduce costs, enhance responsiveness, and improve overall operational readiness. This could include recommending new technologies, streamlining workflows, or developing better data analytics capabilities to support FORSCOM's complex logistical requirements across its various units and missions.

How does the $23.8 million contract value compare to similar logistics consulting contracts within the DoD?

Direct comparison of the $23.8 million contract value for SAWTST LLC's FORSCOM COMET support is challenging without more specific details on the scope and deliverables. However, the average annual value of approximately $4.76 million falls within a common range for large-scale, multi-year professional services contracts within the Department of Defense. Larger, more complex IT or system integration projects can easily exceed this figure, while smaller, more focused consulting engagements might be in the low millions. Given that this contract addresses critical logistics functions for a major command like FORSCOM, the investment appears proportionate to the potential impact on operational efficiency and readiness, assuming satisfactory performance.

What are the potential risks associated with the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award type?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award type presents a nuanced risk profile. While it aims for broad competition initially, the subsequent exclusion of specific sources inherently limits the bidder pool. This limitation can reduce the pressure on remaining bidders to offer the most competitive pricing, potentially leading to higher costs for the government. It also raises concerns about whether the exclusion criteria were justified and transparent. If the excluded sources possessed unique capabilities or offered better value, the government might not have secured the optimal solution. The risk is that the government may not achieve the best possible price or innovation due to a constrained marketplace.

What is the historical spending trend for logistics consulting services within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending on logistics consulting services within the Department of the Army is substantial and generally consistent, reflecting the ongoing need to optimize complex military supply chains and operational support. While the specific figure for this $23.8 million contract is a single data point, the Army, like other branches of the DoD, regularly procures services in areas such as supply chain management, transportation, inventory control, and process improvement. Spending fluctuates based on strategic priorities, technological advancements, and budget allocations. Trends often show an increasing emphasis on data analytics, automation, and resilience in logistics, driving demand for specialized consulting expertise. This contract aligns with that broader trend of investing in logistical modernization.

Does the firm-fixed-price contract type adequately mitigate cost risks for this logistics consulting service?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered a strong tool for mitigating cost risks, as it places the responsibility for cost overruns on the contractor, SAWTST LLC. This means the government pays a set price, regardless of the contractor's actual costs, provided the defined scope of work is delivered. For a consulting service like logistics support, where the scope can be relatively well-defined, FFP is appropriate. However, risks remain if the scope is not precisely managed, leading to change orders, or if the initial pricing was too high due to the limited competition. The primary benefit is budget predictability for the government.

What is SAWTST LLC's track record with federal contracts, particularly in logistics consulting?

SAWTST LLC has been awarded this definitive contract for FORSCOM COMET support, valued at approximately $23.8 million. The data indicates this is a significant contract, suggesting the company has the capacity and qualifications to handle complex federal requirements. Without access to detailed performance reviews or a broader contract history, it's difficult to provide a comprehensive assessment of their track record. However, securing a contract of this magnitude, especially under a competitive process (even with exclusions), implies a level of demonstrated capability and past performance that met the Army's standards. Further investigation into past performance evaluations would be needed for a complete picture.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Process, Physical Distribution, and Logistics Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9124717R0196

Offers Received: 19

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 169 HILLWOOD CIR, NEWNAN, GA, 30263

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,780,133

Exercised Options: $23,780,133

Current Obligation: $23,780,133

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline