DOJ awards $3.3M for IT services to BCT Partners LLC, with a 91-day performance period

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,297 ($3.3K)

Contractor: BCT Partners LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2025-07-01

End Date: 2025-09-30

Contract Duration: 91 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: B1 FY25 BCT PARTNERS FY25 4TH QUARTER 15BNAS21D00000087 SAM OK

Place of Performance

Location: NEWARK, ESSEX County, NEW JERSEY, 07103

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $3,297.29 to BCT PARTNERS LLC for work described as: B1 FY25 BCT PARTNERS FY25 4TH QUARTER 15BNAS21D00000087 SAM OK Key points: 1. The contract value of $3.3 million for a 91-day period suggests a high daily burn rate, warranting scrutiny of efficiency. 2. Competition was conducted under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' indicating a potentially complex procurement process. 3. The fixed-price contract type offers cost certainty but relies on accurate initial scope definition to avoid change orders. 4. Performance is concentrated in New Jersey, potentially indicating a localized need or a specific facility requirement. 5. The IT services category (NAICS 541512) is broad and requires further detail to understand the specific technical requirements and value. 6. The short duration of the contract (91 days) may indicate a project-specific need or a bridge to a larger, long-term solution.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $3.3 million for a 91-day period equates to approximately $36,234 per day. This daily rate is high and suggests a need to understand the specific services rendered. Without more granular data on the deliverables, it is difficult to benchmark against similar contracts. However, for IT systems design services, such a daily expenditure could be justified if it involves highly specialized expertise or critical infrastructure support. Further analysis would require comparing the scope of work to industry standards and other government contracts for similar services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This specific clause suggests that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources may have been excluded for reasons not immediately apparent from the provided data. It implies a deliberate selection process that went beyond a simple open solicitation. The number of bidders is not specified, which limits the ability to assess the intensity of the competition and its potential impact on pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The 'full and open' nature of the competition is generally positive for taxpayers, as it aims to solicit the widest possible range of offers, theoretically leading to better pricing. However, the 'exclusion of sources' caveat warrants further investigation to ensure no potentially competitive firms were unfairly barred.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely components within the Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons, receiving essential IT systems design services. The services delivered are categorized as Computer Systems Design Services, crucial for the operational efficiency and modernization of the agency. The geographic impact is concentrated in New Jersey, suggesting the services are tied to specific facilities or regional operations within the state. Workforce implications could include the need for specialized IT professionals, potentially impacting both government and contractor personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

High daily expenditure rate requires justification through detailed service delivery metrics.
The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type needs clarification to ensure fairness and maximum competition.
Lack of detail on specific IT services provided makes it difficult to assess the true value and necessity of the contract.
Short contract duration may indicate a lack of long-term planning or a stop-gap measure, potentially leading to future inefficiencies.

Positive Signals

Awarded under a 'full and open competition' framework, suggesting an effort to achieve competitive pricing.
The use of a Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract is awarded to a specific entity, BCT Partners LLC, indicating a known contractor is performing the work.

Sector Analysis

The IT services sector within the federal government is vast, encompassing a wide range of needs from basic infrastructure support to advanced cybersecurity and software development. Contracts for computer systems design services, like this one (NAICS 541512), are fundamental to maintaining and upgrading the technological backbone of federal agencies. The market size for federal IT spending is in the tens of billions annually. This specific contract, valued at $3.3 million over 91 days, represents a small fraction of overall federal IT expenditure but is significant for the specific project it supports within the Bureau of Prisons.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications mandated by small business set-aside provisions. The award to BCT Partners LLC, without explicit small business targets, suggests the primary focus was on meeting the technical requirements through the most competitive means available under the procurement regulations. The impact on the small business ecosystem is neutral in terms of direct set-aside benefits.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Justice's internal contracting and program management offices, specifically within the Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons. Accountability measures are typically embedded in the contract's performance work statement, requiring adherence to defined deliverables and timelines. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like SAM.gov, where basic award details are published. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Bureau of Prisons IT Modernization Programs
Department of Justice Information Technology Services
General Services Administration (GSA) IT Schedule Contracts
Procurement of Computer Systems Design Services by Federal Agencies

Risk Flags

High daily burn rate requires justification.
Ambiguity in 'exclusion of sources' clause.
Lack of specific service details.
Short contract duration may indicate fragmented planning.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $3,297.29 to BCT PARTNERS LLC. B1 FY25 BCT PARTNERS FY25 4TH QUARTER 15BNAS21D00000087 SAM OK

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BCT PARTNERS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3,297.29.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-07-01. End: 2025-09-30.

What specific computer systems design services are being provided under this contract, and how do they align with the Bureau of Prisons' strategic IT goals?

The provided data categorizes the contract under NAICS code 541512 (Computer Systems Design Services) but lacks specific details on the services rendered. These services could range from network infrastructure design, software development, system integration, cybersecurity architecture, to IT consulting. To assess alignment with the Bureau of Prisons' strategic IT goals, one would need to review the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS). This document typically outlines the specific tasks, objectives, and expected outcomes. Without the PWS, it's impossible to determine if the $3.3 million investment directly supports modernization efforts, enhances security, or improves operational efficiency in line with agency-wide objectives.

How does the daily cost of approximately $36,234 compare to industry benchmarks for similar IT systems design services, considering the contract's short duration?

The daily expenditure of roughly $36,234 for IT systems design services is substantial. Benchmarking this requires detailed knowledge of the specific services, the level of expertise required (e.g., senior architects vs. junior developers), and the geographic location. For highly specialized, mission-critical IT projects, particularly those involving complex system integration or cybersecurity architecture for a large agency like the Bureau of Prisons, such daily rates might be justifiable if top-tier talent and rapid deployment are necessary. However, without a granular breakdown of labor categories, hours, and specific deliverables, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents good value. Comparisons would ideally be made against similar government contracts awarded under full and open competition or against private sector rates for comparable projects of similar complexity and urgency.

What were the specific reasons for excluding certain sources in a 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procurement, and what was the impact on the number of bids received?

The designation 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' implies that while the competition was intended to be open to all responsible sources, specific entities were intentionally excluded based on pre-defined criteria. These exclusions could stem from various factors, such as specific security clearances required, unique technical capabilities possessed by only a few firms, or prior performance issues with certain contractors. The exact reasons for exclusion are typically documented in the solicitation's Justification and Approval (J&A) for other than full and open competition, or similar documentation if it's a modification of a previously excluded source scenario. The impact on the number of bids is often a reduction compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition, potentially limiting price discovery and increasing the risk of paying a premium if the excluded sources were significant competitors.

What is the track record of BCT Partners LLC in delivering IT systems design services to the federal government, particularly for agencies of similar size and complexity to the Bureau of Prisons?

Information regarding BCT Partners LLC's specific track record in delivering IT systems design services to the federal government, especially for agencies comparable in size and complexity to the Bureau of Prisons, is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), the scope and value of previous federal contracts, and client agency feedback. Understanding their history with similar IT projects, adherence to schedules, budget performance, and overall quality of work is crucial for evaluating the risk associated with this $3.3 million award. Without this background information, it's difficult to gauge their reliability and expertise in this specific domain.

Given the short 91-day performance period, does this contract represent a one-time project, or is it indicative of a larger, ongoing need for IT systems design services within the Bureau of Prisons?

The 91-day performance period (approximately three months) strongly suggests that this contract is intended for a specific, short-term project or task rather than a broad, ongoing requirement. Such short durations are often used for discrete phases of larger projects, rapid prototyping, emergency support, or as bridge contracts to cover needs while a longer-term, larger contract is being procured. To determine if it indicates a larger ongoing need, one would need to examine the Bureau of Prisons' IT strategic plan, budget requests for future fiscal years, and any other recently awarded or planned contracts for similar IT services. If similar short-term contracts are frequently awarded, it might point to a fragmented approach to IT acquisition or a strategy of breaking down large needs into smaller, manageable procurements.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MEDICAL/DENTAL/VETERINARY EQPT/SUPP

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 105 LOCK ST STE 203, NEWARK, NJ, 07103

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,297

Exercised Options: $3,297

Current Obligation: $3,297

Actual Outlays: $3,297

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HHSN316201200074W

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline