DoD's $10.9M contract with Computer Sciences Corporation for IT services awarded under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,929,995 ($10.9M)

Contractor: Computer Sciences Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-09-08

End Date: 2008-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,757 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Place of Performance

Location: EATONTOWN, MONMOUTH County, NEW JERSEY, 07724

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.9 million to COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded for IT services, indicating a need for technology support within the Department of the Army. 2. The contract was secured through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. A firm-fixed-price contract type implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. 4. The contract duration of 1757 days (approx. 4.8 years) suggests a significant, long-term requirement. 5. The award to Computer Sciences Corporation, a large established IT firm, points to a focus on experienced providers. 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 deliverables or performance metrics. However, the $10.9 million total value over nearly five years averages to approximately $2.3 million annually. This figure needs to be compared against the scope and complexity of the IT services provided. Given the firm-fixed-price structure, the government aimed to secure a defined set of services at a predictable cost, which can be a value-for-money indicator if the services met expectations.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 2 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this requirement. While more than one bid is positive, a higher number of bidders typically leads to more robust price discovery and potentially lower prices for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process, even with only two offers, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging more favorable pricing and service offerings compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the personnel and operations within the Department of the Army that rely on the IT services provided. Services delivered would encompass a range of IT support, potentially including system maintenance, network operations, software development, or cybersecurity. The geographic impact is centered around the Department of the Army's operational locations, primarily within New Jersey where the contractor is based. Workforce implications include the employment of IT professionals by Computer Sciences Corporation to fulfill the contract requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition with only two bidders could mean less aggressive pricing than a more crowded field.
The specific IT services and their criticality are not detailed, making it hard to assess if the price reflects true market value.
The contract's age (awarded in 2003) means current market rates and technological capabilities may have significantly evolved.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, ensuring a fair opportunity for multiple vendors.
Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially protecting the government from unexpected expenses.
The contractor, Computer Sciences Corporation, is a large, established entity with a significant track record in government IT services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology sector, specifically supporting government IT infrastructure and services. The IT services market for the federal government is substantial, with billions spent annually on software, hardware, and related services. This contract represents a portion of the Department of Defense's overall IT spending, which is critical for maintaining operational readiness and technological superiority. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific IT services procured, but contracts of this size are common for supporting large government agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Computer Sciences Corporation is a large business. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or actual performance related to small business participation. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific prime contract is likely minimal, unless CSC actively subcontracted portions to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and administrative contracting officer within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, requiring CSC to deliver specified services within the agreed budget. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award data being publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense IT Services Contracts
Army IT Modernization Programs
Information Technology Support Services
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems Support
Cybersecurity Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition may impact price optimization.
Contract duration could lead to technology obsolescence if not managed.
Specific service details are absent, hindering full value assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.9 million to COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-08. End: 2008-06-30.

What was the specific nature of the IT services provided under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the IT services. However, given the contractor (Computer Sciences Corporation) and the awarding agency (Department of the Army), the services likely encompassed a broad range of IT support. This could include areas such as network management, system administration, software development and maintenance, help desk support, cybersecurity operations, or data center management. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope of work was established, but without further details, the precise deliverables remain unknown.

How does the $10.9 million contract value compare to similar IT service contracts awarded by the DoD around 2003?

Comparing the $10.9 million value requires context on the specific IT services. In 2003, the DoD was heavily investing in IT modernization and network-centric warfare capabilities. Contracts of this magnitude were not uncommon for supporting major commands or specific technology initiatives. For instance, large-scale system integration, sustainment of complex networks, or development of new software platforms could easily reach this value. However, without knowing the exact services, it's difficult to benchmark precisely against other contracts. A contract for basic help desk services would be high, while one for a major system overhaul might be considered moderate.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract of this duration?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, especially one spanning nearly five years, is that the defined scope may become outdated or insufficient due to evolving technological needs or unforeseen requirements. If the contractor accurately estimated costs and the government's needs remain stable, FFP offers cost certainty. However, if the government's requirements change significantly, scope adjustments can be complex and costly. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating costs or facing unexpected technical challenges, potentially leading to reduced profit margins or even losses if changes aren't managed contractually. For the government, the risk is paying for services that may become obsolete or inadequate over the contract's life if not managed proactively.

What does the limited competition (2 bidders) suggest about the contractor's advantage?

Having only two bidders suggests that the market for this specific requirement might have been concentrated, or the barriers to entry were significant, potentially favoring established players like Computer Sciences Corporation. While 'full and open competition' was utilized, a low number of bids can indicate less aggressive pricing pressure than might be seen with numerous competitors. This could imply that CSC faced less direct price competition, potentially allowing for higher profit margins than if they were competing against a larger pool of vendors. It also raises questions about whether the solicitation process or the nature of the requirement itself deterred broader participation.

How has Computer Sciences Corporation's performance evolved since this contract was awarded in 2003?

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) has undergone significant transformations since 2003. In 2017, CSC merged with the enterprise services business of Hewlett Packard Enterprise to form DXC Technology. Therefore, assessing CSC's performance directly post-2003 requires looking at historical data from that era. DXC Technology continues to serve the federal government, including the DoD. Evaluating their track record involves examining contract performance reviews, past performance questionnaires, and any documented issues or commendations across their numerous federal contracts over the past two decades. Their longevity and continued presence suggest a generally capable, albeit evolving, service provider.

What is the historical spending trend for similar IT services within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending trends for IT services within the Department of the Army have generally shown a consistent and significant increase over the years, particularly following the early 2000s. Driven by the need for modernization, cybersecurity, cloud migration, and data analytics, the Army's IT budget has consistently been in the billions of dollars annually. Contracts like the one awarded to CSC in 2003 were part of this larger investment. Post-2003, spending has continued to grow, reflecting the increasing reliance on technology for command and control, logistics, personnel management, and intelligence. Trends show a shift towards more agile development, cloud-based solutions, and robust cybersecurity measures, indicating evolving priorities within Army IT procurement.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 442 HIGHWAY 35 S, EATONTOWN, NJ, 04

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,666,644

Exercised Options: $11,666,644

Current Obligation: $10,929,995

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DAAB0797AY002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline