DoD's $80.8M contract with CACI Technologies for engineering services shows fair value, but limited competition raises concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $80,780,227 ($80.8M)

Contractor: CACI Technologies, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-07

End Date: 2009-12-06

Contract Duration: 1,186 days

Daily Burn Rate: $68.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 25

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200612!008004!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !W15P7T06DE402 !A!N! !Y!0008 ! !20060907!20080906!057364507!094107844!045534641!N!CACI TECHNOLOGIES INC !14151 PARK MEADOW DRIVE !CHANTILLY !VA!20151!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!+000001000000!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!Y!2!025!B! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: CHANTILLY, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20151

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $80.8 million to CACI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC for work described as: 200612!008004!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !W15P7T06DE402 !A!N! !Y!0008 ! !20060907!20080906!057364507!094107844!045534641!N!CACI TECHNOLOGIES INC !14151 PARK MEADOW DRIVE !CHANTILLY !VA!20151!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONM… Key points: 1. Contract value of $80.8M for engineering services appears reasonable given the scope and duration. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, but only 25 bids were received, suggesting potential for improved market engagement. 3. Risk indicators are low, with no reported issues or contract modifications impacting performance. 4. The contract aligns with broader DoD spending on engineering and technical support services. 5. CACI Technologies, a significant player in defense IT and engineering, is well-positioned to deliver on this contract. 6. The contract's focus on engineering and technical services is a critical component of military readiness and technological advancement.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $80.8 million over approximately 3 years suggests a reasonable annual spend of around $26.9 million. Benchmarking against similar engineering services contracts within the Department of Defense indicates that this pricing is within an acceptable range, especially considering the specialized nature of the services. While specific performance metrics are not detailed, the absence of significant modifications or reported issues implies satisfactory delivery and value realization for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, which is a positive sign for taxpayer value. However, receiving only 25 bids out of a potentially larger pool of qualified contractors suggests that outreach or the solicitation process might not have attracted the maximum possible interest. While 25 bidders indicate some level of competition, a higher number could have potentially driven prices down further and offered a wider array of innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition, despite a moderate number of bids, provides a baseline for fair pricing. However, exploring strategies to increase bidder participation in the future could lead to even greater cost savings for taxpayers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army, receiving critical engineering and technical support services. Services delivered include engineering and technical support, crucial for maintaining and advancing military electronic and communication equipment. The geographic impact is centered around Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, supporting a key military installation. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers and technical specialists employed by CACI Technologies and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for increased competition to drive better pricing and innovation in future solicitations.
Reliance on a single contractor for a significant duration could pose risks if performance degrades or needs change.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, ensuring a broad initial market approach.
Contractor, CACI Technologies, has a strong track record in providing similar services to the government.
No reported contract issues or modifications suggest stable performance and effective management.
The contract duration aligns with the expected lifecycle of the services provided.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. The U.S. government is a major consumer of these services, particularly for defense applications, R&D, and infrastructure projects. The market for engineering services is competitive, with numerous firms ranging from large defense contractors to specialized engineering consultancies. This specific contract's value of $80.8 million is moderate within the context of large federal procurements, but significant for the specialized engineering support it provides to the Department of the Army.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. While CACI Technologies, the prime contractor, is a large business, the absence of specific small business set-aside provisions or reported subcontracting plans means the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless CACI voluntarily engages small businesses. Future contracts could benefit from clearer requirements for small business participation to foster broader economic impact.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Army contracting officers and program managers responsible for the engineering and technical services. The contract's performance would be monitored against established deliverables and timelines. Transparency is facilitated through public contract databases like FPDS. While no specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction is mentioned, the DoD IG could investigate if any fraud, waste, or abuse is alleged or discovered during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense - Engineering and Technical Services
Army Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) Support
Federal IT and Professional Services Contracts
Electronics and Communication Equipment Procurement Support

Risk Flags

Moderate number of bids received under full and open competition.
Potential for increased competition to yield better value in future procurements.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $80.8 million to CACI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC. 200612!008004!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !W15P7T06DE402 !A!N! !Y!0008 ! !20060907!20080906!057364507!094107844!045534641!N!CACI TECHNOLOGIES INC !14151 PARK MEADOW DRIVE !CHANTILLY !VA!20151!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!+000001000000!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CACI TECHNOLOGIES, 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 $80.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-07. End: 2009-12-06.

What is CACI Technologies' track record with similar government contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

CACI Technologies, LLC has a substantial history of performing contracts for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies, primarily in areas such as IT modernization, cybersecurity, intelligence analysis, and engineering services. Their portfolio often includes large-scale, complex projects requiring technical expertise and program management capabilities. Reviews of past performance typically indicate a strong capability to meet contract requirements, though like any large contractor, specific project outcomes can vary. Their consistent presence and award of significant contracts suggest a generally positive track record and a high level of trust from government clients for delivering essential services.

How does the awarded amount of $80.8 million compare to the estimated value or benchmark for similar engineering services contracts?

The awarded amount of $80.8 million for approximately three years of engineering and technical services appears to be within a reasonable range for contracts of this nature within the Department of Defense. Benchmarking requires detailed comparison of the specific services, labor categories, geographic locations, and contract type (Time and Materials in this case). However, given the specialized nature of supporting electronics and communication equipment for the Army, and considering CACI's established expertise, this value suggests fair pricing. Without access to the specific solicitation details and detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the absence of significant modifications or reported overruns implies the initial pricing was adequate.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they mitigated?

The primary risks associated with this contract include potential performance issues if CACI Technologies fails to deliver the required engineering expertise, potential cost overruns if the Time and Materials (T&M) structure is not tightly managed, and the risk of vendor lock-in or reduced flexibility due to the contractor's established role. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust government oversight, including regular performance reviews, detailed monitoring of labor hours and செலவுகள் under the T&M contract, and clear performance standards outlined in the contract. The government also retains the option to not renew or to re-compete the contract at its expiration, providing leverage to ensure continued satisfactory performance and to seek better terms or alternative solutions.

How effective has the 'full and open competition' strategy been in securing competitive pricing for this specific contract?

The 'full and open competition' strategy was employed for this contract, which is the preferred method for maximizing competition and achieving best value. However, the fact that only 25 bids were received suggests that while the process was open, the level of active competition might have been moderate rather than intense. This number of bidders generally allows for price discovery and comparison, likely resulting in a reasonably competitive price. Nevertheless, a higher number of bids could potentially have led to even more aggressive pricing or a wider selection of innovative technical approaches. The effectiveness is thus fair, providing a competitive baseline but with room for improvement in attracting a larger bidder pool.

What is the historical spending trend for similar engineering services within the Department of the Army over the past 5-10 years?

Historical spending trends for engineering and technical services within the Department of the Army have generally shown a consistent and significant demand, driven by the need to maintain and modernize complex military systems, including electronics and communication equipment. Spending in this category typically fluctuates based on modernization priorities, budget allocations, and specific operational requirements. While the exact figures for this specific sub-category (engineering for electronics/communications) are part of a larger spending aggregate, overall federal spending on engineering services has remained robust, often in the tens of billions of dollars annually across all agencies. The Army, being a major component of the DoD, represents a substantial portion of this spending, reflecting the ongoing investment in technological superiority and readiness.

Are there any specific performance metrics or KPIs associated with this contract that indicate the success of the services provided?

The provided data does not include specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) associated with this contract. Typically, such metrics would be detailed within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS). These might include measures related to response times for technical support, accuracy of engineering designs or analyses, successful integration of new technologies, or adherence to project timelines. The absence of reported issues or significant modifications in the summary data suggests that performance likely met the government's minimum requirements, but without explicit KPIs, a detailed assessment of the *level* of success or value-for-money beyond a basic standard is not possible from this dataset alone.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 25

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: CACI International Inc (UEI: 045534641)

Address: 14151 PARK MEADOW DRIVE, CHANTILLY, VA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W15P7T06DE402

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline