DoD's $16.5M contract for computer and office machine repair awarded to CASE, LLC shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,515,925 ($16.5M)

Contractor: Case, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-10-25

End Date: 2010-08-15

Contract Duration: 1,755 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Place of Performance

Location: FORT MONROE, HAMPTON (CITY) County, VIRGINIA, 23651

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $16.5 million to CASE, LLC for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract's duration of 1755 days (approx. 4.8 years) suggests a long-term need for repair services. 2. Awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES', the competition dynamics warrant closer examination. 3. The fixed-firm price contract type provides cost certainty but may not capture all potential efficiencies. 4. The contract's performance period spanned from October 2005 to August 2010, indicating historical spending patterns. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 811212 points to a specialized repair and maintenance market. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns. The total award amount of $16.5 million over nearly five years averages to approximately $3.4 million annually. This figure needs to be compared against the volume and complexity of equipment repaired, as well as the prevailing market rates for similar services during the contract period (2005-2010). Without more granular data, it's difficult to definitively assess if this represented excellent value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. This specific procurement method suggests that while an initial broad competition may have occurred, certain sources were subsequently excluded before the final award. The implications for price discovery are mixed; it could indicate a desire to work with specific capabilities while still seeking competitive bids, but it also limits the pool of potential offerors compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition. The number of bidders is not specified, which further obscures the true level of competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources, even if justified, may have limited the potential for the most competitive pricing, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers than a fully open competition might have achieved.

Public Impact

Military personnel and government agencies benefit from the continued operational readiness of their computer and office machines. Essential maintenance and repair services are delivered to ensure the functionality of critical equipment. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the Department of the Army's installations where the equipment is located. The contract supports a workforce skilled in the repair and maintenance of various office and computer equipment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources' clause.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Contract awarded over a decade ago, market conditions and pricing may have significantly changed.
The specific nature of 'exclusion of sources' is not detailed, raising questions about fairness.

Positive Signals

Awarded under a competitive process, indicating some level of market engagement.
Firm Fixed Price contract provides budget certainty.
Long contract duration suggests a sustained need and potential for established service relationships.

Sector Analysis

The market for computer and office machine repair and maintenance is a specialized segment within the broader IT services industry. This contract falls under NAICS code 811212. The size and competitiveness of this market can vary significantly based on the type of equipment, geographic location, and the specific needs of large institutional buyers like the Department of Defense. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other government contracts for similar repair services or private sector IT maintenance agreements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The primary contractor, CASE, LLC, would have been responsible for fulfilling the contract requirements.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and approving payments. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively. Transparency regarding the contract's details, including award amount and period of performance, is generally available through federal procurement databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

IT Support Services
Maintenance and Repair Contracts
Department of Defense Procurement
Information Technology Equipment Maintenance

Risk Flags

Limited Competition Potential
Lack of Performance Metrics
Historical Data (Awarded 2005-2010)
Unspecified Exclusion Justification

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $16.5 million to CASE, LLC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CASE, 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 $16.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-10-25. End: 2010-08-15.

What was the specific justification for excluding certain sources in this 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award?

The justification for excluding specific sources under this procurement method is not detailed in the provided data. Typically, such exclusions are based on factors like the need for specific technical capabilities, proprietary technology, or prior performance issues with certain vendors. However, without further documentation from the contracting agency (Department of the Army), the precise reasons remain unknown. This lack of transparency can raise concerns about whether the exclusion unduly limited competition and potentially impacted the final price achieved for the government. Further investigation would require accessing the contract's solicitation documents and award justification files.

How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar IT maintenance contracts awarded by the DoD during the same period?

To compare the average annual cost of this $16.5 million contract (approximately $3.4 million per year) to similar DoD IT maintenance contracts from 2005-2010, one would need access to a broader dataset of federal procurement awards. Key comparison points would include the scope of services (e.g., types of equipment covered, response times, preventative maintenance schedules), the number of units supported, and the specific technologies involved. Contracts for basic hardware repair might be cheaper per unit than those involving complex system integration or specialized equipment. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this contract represented a favorable or unfavorable price point for the government.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate CASE, LLC's performance under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) that were used to evaluate CASE, LLC's performance. In a contract of this nature, typical KPIs might include metrics such as equipment uptime percentages, average repair turnaround times, customer satisfaction ratings from end-users, and adherence to service level agreements (SLAs). The absence of this information makes it challenging to assess the quality of service delivered and whether the contractor met the government's expectations beyond simply completing the repair tasks. Understanding these KPIs would be crucial for a comprehensive value-for-money assessment.

What is the track record of CASE, LLC with federal contracts, particularly in IT maintenance and repair?

The provided data indicates that CASE, LLC was awarded this specific Department of the Army contract. To assess their broader track record, one would need to examine other federal contract awards to this entity. This would involve searching databases like SAM.gov or FPDS for past and present contracts, noting the agencies involved, the services rendered, the contract values, and any performance history (e.g., awards, terminations, disputes). A history of successful, on-time, and within-budget contract completions would suggest reliability, while a pattern of issues could indicate higher risk. Without this broader context, the assessment of CASE, LLC's track record is limited to this single award.

How has federal spending on IT maintenance and repair services evolved since this contract was awarded in 2005?

Federal spending on IT maintenance and repair services has likely seen significant evolution since this contract was awarded in 2005. Key trends include a shift towards cloud computing, increased reliance on software-as-a-service (SaaS), and a move towards consolidated IT infrastructure. This could mean a decrease in demand for traditional hardware repair for some types of equipment, while potentially increasing demand for specialized maintenance of complex systems or cybersecurity-related services. Furthermore, procurement strategies have evolved, with greater emphasis on performance-based contracts and agile acquisition methods. Analyzing historical spending data from agencies like DoD would reveal shifts in budget allocation and the types of services prioritized over time.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance › Computer and Office Machine Repair and Maintenance

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Chenega Corporation (UEI: 622692994)

Address: 645 CHURCH STREET, NORFOLK, VA, 03

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, HUBZone Firm, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline