Commerce awards $6M for Netskope SASE, highlighting a brand name requirement

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,072,747 ($6.1M)

Contractor: Anacapa Micro Products, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Commerce

Start Date: 2024-01-01

End Date: 2026-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,095 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: BRAND NAME ONLY REQUIREMENT FOR NETSKOPE'S SECURE ACCESS SERVICE EDGE (SASE) SOLUTION

Place of Performance

Location: VENTURA, VENTURA County, CALIFORNIA, 93006

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Commerce obligated $6.1 million to ANACAPA MICRO PRODUCTS, INC. for work described as: BRAND NAME ONLY REQUIREMENT FOR NETSKOPE'S SECURE ACCESS SERVICE EDGE (SASE) SOLUTION Key points: 1. The contract's value of $6.07 million over three years suggests a significant investment in secure network access. 2. A brand name only requirement for Netskope's SASE solution raises questions about potential limitations on competition and cost-effectiveness. 3. The fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty but may not fully capture potential savings from competitive bidding. 4. The award was made under full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a deliberate decision to limit the initial pool. 5. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's reliance on this specific SASE solution points to critical cybersecurity needs. 6. The duration of the contract (1095 days) aligns with typical enterprise software deployment and support cycles.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without knowing the specific features and scale of Netskope's Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solution. However, the $6.07 million award over three years, coupled with a brand-name-only requirement, suggests a potentially higher cost than if a broader range of SASE providers were considered. While the firm fixed-price nature offers budget predictability, it may not represent the best possible value if alternative solutions could meet the requirements at a lower price point. Further analysis would require comparing the per-user or per-feature cost against industry averages for similar SASE deployments.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This designation implies that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources were excluded prior to the solicitation, or the requirement was narrowly defined (e.g., brand name) which inherently limits the pool of potential bidders. The data indicates 3 bids were received, suggesting some level of interest, but the 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation into why certain vendors might have been precluded from bidding.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, particularly if driven by a brand-name requirement, may result in taxpayers paying a premium for the chosen solution compared to what could be achieved through a more open and inclusive bidding process.

Public Impact

Federal employees, particularly those within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, will benefit from enhanced secure network access and data protection. The contract delivers a Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solution, crucial for modernizing network security and enabling remote workforces. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Commerce's facilities, but the nature of SASE supports distributed users nationwide. Workforce implications include enabling IT staff to manage a more integrated and potentially more efficient network security infrastructure.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Brand name only requirement limits competition and potentially increases costs.
Exclusion of sources prior to competition may have artificially narrowed the bidder pool.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in the provided data makes assessing effectiveness difficult.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Awarded under a competitive process, albeit with exclusions, suggesting some level of market vetting.
The contract duration of three years allows for stable implementation and support of the SASE solution.

Sector Analysis

The Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) market is a rapidly growing segment of the cybersecurity and networking industry, converging network capabilities with security functions. This contract fits within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on network security and cloud-based solutions. The U.S. government is a significant investor in cybersecurity technologies to protect its vast digital infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other federal procurements for SASE solutions or similar integrated network security platforms, considering factors like user count, feature sets, and contract duration.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any small business set-aside provisions for this contract, nor does it specify subcontracting goals. Given the nature of SASE solutions often provided by larger technology firms, it is possible that the prime contractor is a large business. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine the extent of small business participation and its impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is publicly available. The Inspector General for the Department of Commerce may have jurisdiction for audits and investigations related to potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) IT Schedule Contracts
Cybersecurity and Information Security Services
Network Infrastructure Modernization Programs
Cloud Computing Services

Risk Flags

Brand Name Requirement
Limited Competition
Potential for Higher Cost

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Commerce awarded $6.1 million to ANACAPA MICRO PRODUCTS, INC.. BRAND NAME ONLY REQUIREMENT FOR NETSKOPE'S SECURE ACCESS SERVICE EDGE (SASE) SOLUTION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ANACAPA MICRO PRODUCTS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Commerce (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-01-01. End: 2026-12-31.

What is the specific justification for the brand name only requirement for Netskope's SASE solution?

The justification for a brand name only requirement typically stems from a determination that only a specific manufacturer's product can meet the agency's needs due to unique capabilities, compatibility issues with existing systems, or established performance standards. For Netskope's SASE, this could relate to specific security features, integration with legacy systems at the USPTO, or a proven track record in handling the agency's unique threat landscape. Without explicit documentation from the agency, such as a Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC), the precise reasoning remains speculative. However, such requirements often face scrutiny for potentially limiting competition and increasing costs, necessitating a strong rationale tied to essential agency functions.

How does the $6.07 million cost compare to similar SASE deployments in the federal government?

Direct cost comparison for SASE solutions is complex due to variations in features, user counts, support levels, and contract durations. The $6.07 million award for a three-year period suggests an average annual cost of approximately $2.02 million. To benchmark this, one would need to identify comparable federal contracts for SASE solutions with similar user bases and service level agreements. Factors like the number of protected endpoints, the scope of security services (e.g., SWG, CASB, ZTNA), and the level of technical support significantly influence pricing. A preliminary assessment indicates this is a substantial investment, and without detailed feature-for-feature comparisons, it's difficult to definitively state if it represents excellent or fair value. Further analysis of per-user costs against market rates for comparable SASE providers would be beneficial.

What are the potential risks associated with a brand name only procurement for critical network security infrastructure?

Procuring critical network security infrastructure like a SASE solution using a brand name only requirement carries several risks. Firstly, it significantly limits competition, potentially leading to higher prices than could be achieved in a fully open market. This lack of competition can reduce the incentive for the sole-source provider to offer the most competitive pricing or the best service. Secondly, it may prevent the government from accessing potentially superior or more cost-effective solutions from other vendors that could better meet evolving security needs. Thirdly, it can create vendor lock-in, making future transitions to different providers more difficult and costly. Finally, it raises concerns about whether the chosen brand truly represents the optimal solution or if the requirement was influenced by factors other than pure technical necessity and best value.

What does the 'after exclusion of sources' clause imply about the competition process?

The 'after exclusion of sources' clause in a 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' award indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, certain potential sources were deliberately excluded from the bidding process. This exclusion could be based on various factors, such as pre-qualification criteria, specific technical requirements that only a subset of vendors could meet, or prior performance issues. In the context of a brand name requirement, it's highly probable that the exclusion was a direct consequence of specifying 'Netskope' as the only acceptable solution, thereby excluding all other SASE vendors. This approach aims to ensure a specific product is considered but fundamentally curtails the breadth of competition compared to a truly open solicitation where all responsible sources are invited to bid without pre-determined exclusions.

What is the track record of Anacapa Micro Products, Inc. in providing SASE solutions or similar IT services to the federal government?

Information regarding Anacapa Micro Products, Inc.'s specific track record in providing Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) solutions or extensive IT services to the federal government is not readily available in the provided data snippet. The data indicates they are the prime contractor for this award. To assess their track record, one would need to consult federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) for past contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS), and the scope of services they have previously delivered. Without this information, it's difficult to gauge their experience level and past performance reliability in managing complex cybersecurity and network infrastructure contracts of this magnitude.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Other Computer Related Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - NETWORK

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)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Anacapa Micro Products Inc.

Address: 1901 SOLAR DR STE 150, OXNARD, CA, 93036

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,657,260

Exercised Options: $6,072,747

Current Obligation: $6,072,747

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NNG15SD64B

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline