DoD's $13.37M satellite services contract with Peraton Government Communications Inc. awarded in 2004

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,370,642 ($13.4M)

Contractor: Peraton Government Communications Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-04-28

End Date: 2009-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,889 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SATELLITE SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: FAIRFAX, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22031, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.4 million to PERATON GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS INC. for work described as: SATELLITE SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in satellite telecommunications infrastructure. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract (over 5 years) indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs and provide predictable spending. 5. Awarded to Peraton Government Communications Inc., a key player in government IT and communications. 6. The services fall under the 'Satellite Telecommunications' NAICS code, a specialized sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award value of $13.37 million for satellite services over nearly five years appears reasonable given the nature of telecommunications infrastructure. Without specific performance metrics or detailed service breakdowns, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the firm-fixed-price contract type suggests an effort to manage costs effectively. Benchmarking against similar large-scale satellite service contracts would provide further insight into its competitiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was open, there might have been specific reasons for excluding certain sources initially. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition. This type of competition generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government compared to sole-source or limited competitions.

Taxpayer Impact: The open competition, even with initial exclusions, likely resulted in a more competitive pricing environment, benefiting taxpayers by ensuring the government received services at a fair market rate.

Public Impact

Provides critical satellite communication services to the Department of Defense. Ensures reliable connectivity for military operations and personnel. Supports national security objectives through robust communication infrastructure. The services likely have a nationwide or global geographic impact due to the nature of satellite communications.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in if specialized equipment or services are required.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical communication infrastructure poses a risk.
The 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation into the rationale.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract helps control budget and prevent cost overruns.
Full and open competition generally leads to better pricing and service options.
Long contract duration suggests a stable and reliable service provider.

Sector Analysis

The satellite telecommunications sector is a critical component of modern defense and civilian infrastructure, enabling global communication. This contract fits within the broader IT and Defense sectors, specifically addressing the need for reliable, high-bandwidth communication channels. The market is characterized by high barriers to entry due to technological complexity and capital investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale satellite service procurements by government agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (sb: false). There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this award. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though large prime contracts often have subcontracting requirements that can benefit smaller firms.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management offices. The firm-fixed-price nature provides a degree of financial oversight by locking in costs. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance reviews and audits are internal processes. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) contracts
Satellite Communications Services
Department of Defense IT Procurement
Firm Fixed Price Contracts
Government Telecommunications Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Potential for technological obsolescence over contract duration.
Reliance on a single provider for critical communication infrastructure.
Rationale for 'exclusion of sources' requires further clarification.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.4 million to PERATON GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS INC.. SATELLITE SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PERATON GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Information Systems Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-04-28. End: 2009-06-30.

What was the specific rationale for 'exclusion of sources' in this full and open competition?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' designation suggests that while the competition was intended to be open, certain potential bidders were excluded from the outset. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed in the provided data but could stem from factors such as security clearances, specialized technical capabilities, existing infrastructure compatibility, or prior performance issues. Understanding the precise criteria for exclusion is crucial for assessing whether the competition was truly as broad as possible and if any potential cost savings were foregone due to these exclusions. Agencies typically document these exclusion justifications to ensure compliance with federal procurement regulations.

How does the per-unit cost of this contract compare to market rates for similar satellite services during the contract period?

Determining the precise per-unit cost for this contract is challenging without a detailed breakdown of the services provided (e.g., bandwidth, data volume, satellite access type, duration). The total award of $13.37 million over approximately 1889 days (about 5.17 years) averages to roughly $2.58 million per year. To benchmark this against market rates, one would need to compare it with similar government or commercial satellite service contracts awarded between 2004 and 2009, considering factors like geographic coverage, service level agreements, and technology used. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether the pricing was competitive.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this satellite services contract, and how did Peraton perform against them?

The provided data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or performance reports for this contract. Typically, satellite service contracts would include metrics related to uptime, latency, bandwidth availability, data throughput, and response times for technical support. Assessing Peraton's performance would require access to contract performance evaluations, customer satisfaction surveys, and any documented instances of service failures or successes. The absence of this information limits the ability to evaluate the effectiveness and quality of the services delivered under this award.

What is the historical spending trend for satellite telecommunications services within the Department of Defense, and how does this contract fit?

This contract, awarded in 2004 for $13.37 million, represents a specific investment within the broader category of satellite telecommunications for the Department of Defense (DoD). Historical spending trends would reveal if this amount was typical, high, or low for similar services during that period. The DoD is a major consumer of satellite services due to its global operational requirements. Analyzing spending patterns over several years prior to and following this award would indicate whether this contract was part of a growing, stable, or declining investment in such capabilities. It's likely part of a larger, ongoing effort to maintain robust and secure communication networks.

What are the potential risks associated with a long-term (1889 days) firm-fixed-price contract for satellite services?

Long-term firm-fixed-price contracts for satellite services carry several potential risks. Firstly, technological obsolescence is a significant concern; satellite technology evolves rapidly, and a contract spanning over five years might lock the government into using older or less efficient systems. Secondly, if the contractor underestimated costs or faced unforeseen operational challenges, they might seek to cut corners on service quality to maintain profitability, potentially impacting reliability. Conversely, if market prices for satellite services decrease significantly during the contract term, the government might be overpaying. Finally, the fixed nature of the price can reduce flexibility to incorporate new requirements or upgrades without costly contract modifications.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Satellite Telecommunications › Satellite Telecommunications

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: L3harris Technologies, Inc (UEI: 004203337)

Address: 2235 MONROE ST STE 500, HERNDON, VA, 20171

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $62,198,645

Exercised Options: $62,151,848

Current Obligation: $13,370,642

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DCA20001D5004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline