DOJ's $85.9M Microsoft ELA renewal with Minburn Technology Group raises value and competition questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $85,905,182 ($85.9M)

Contractor: Minburn Technology Group, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2021-05-06

End Date: 2022-04-30

Contract Duration: 359 days

Daily Burn Rate: $239.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: FY21 MICROSOFT ELA OPTION YR 1 RENEWAL CO: FITZGERALD ESCALONA POP: 5/1/21 - 4/30/22

Place of Performance

Location: GREAT FALLS, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22066

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $85.9 million to MINBURN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC for work described as: FY21 MICROSOFT ELA OPTION YR 1 RENEWAL CO: FITZGERALD ESCALONA POP: 5/1/21 - 4/30/22 Key points: 1. The contract represents a significant expenditure for IT software licensing and support. 2. Limited competition for this renewal suggests potential for suboptimal pricing. 3. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts performance risk to the contractor. 4. This contract falls within the broader category of IT services for federal agencies. 5. The duration of the contract is approximately one year. 6. The specific NAICS code indicates a focus on 'Other Computer Related Services'.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this specific Microsoft ELA renewal is challenging without access to comparable government-wide agreements or detailed pricing breakdowns. However, the absence of a competitive process for a renewal of this magnitude warrants scrutiny. The firm-fixed-price nature provides cost certainty but does not inherently guarantee the best possible price. Further analysis would require comparing the per-unit costs of licenses and support against GSA schedules or other agency-negotiated agreements for similar Microsoft products and services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was not competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), indicating it likely exceeded the threshold for full and open competition. The data explicitly states 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP,' which, combined with the single award, suggests a sole-source or limited competition scenario. Without further details on the justification for not pursuing a broader competition, it is difficult to assess the extent of market engagement. This limited competition may have restricted price discovery and potentially led to a higher overall cost.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of robust competition for this substantial IT software renewal means taxpayers may not have benefited from the most competitive pricing available in the market. This could translate to millions in potentially overpaid funds for software licenses and support services.

Public Impact

Federal employees within the Department of Justice will benefit from continued access to Microsoft software and support. The services delivered include the renewal of an Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) for Microsoft products. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Justice's operational areas. Workforce implications include ensuring IT infrastructure stability and productivity for DOJ personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competitive bidding for a significant software renewal.
Potential for inflated pricing due to limited market engagement.
Absence of detailed justification for sole-source or limited competition.
Uncertainty regarding the best value achieved for taxpayer funds.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts performance risk to the contractor.
Ensures continuity of essential Microsoft software for DOJ operations.
The contractor, Minburn Technology Group, is performing the delivery order.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT services sector, specifically focusing on software licensing and support. The market for enterprise software agreements, particularly for major vendors like Microsoft, is characterized by large, long-term contracts. Federal agencies often rely on ELAs to standardize software and manage costs across their organizations. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other federal ELAs for Microsoft or similar software suites, as well as the overall IT spending within the Department of Justice.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not awarded to a small business (ss: false) and does not appear to have a small business set-aside component (sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from this specific award. The focus is on a large enterprise agreement, likely managed by a prime contractor capable of handling such a scope.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Justice's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver specified software and support. Transparency could be enhanced by making the justification for limited competition publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Justice IT Modernization Initiatives
Federal Enterprise Software Licensing Programs
Microsoft Enterprise Agreements
IT Services Contracts
Software Maintenance and Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for overpayment due to lack of competition.
Lack of transparency regarding the justification for limited competition.
Need for detailed cost-benefit analysis of the ELA renewal.
Reliance on a single vendor for critical software infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $85.9 million to MINBURN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC. FY21 MICROSOFT ELA OPTION YR 1 RENEWAL CO: FITZGERALD ESCALONA POP: 5/1/21 - 4/30/22

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MINBURN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Offices, Boards and Divisions).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $85.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-05-06. End: 2022-04-30.

What is the track record of Minburn Technology Group in performing similar federal IT contracts, particularly large enterprise software agreements?

Assessing Minburn Technology Group's track record requires a deeper dive into federal procurement databases like FPDS-NG. While this specific award is for a significant amount, understanding their history with similar Microsoft ELAs or large-scale IT service delivery is crucial. Key indicators would include past performance reviews, contract modifications, and any reported issues on previous federal contracts. Without this granular data, it's difficult to definitively gauge their capability and reliability for this specific renewal, beyond the fact they were selected for this delivery order.

How does the per-unit cost of licenses and support in this ELA compare to other federal agencies or GSA schedules for similar Microsoft products?

A direct comparison of per-unit costs is challenging without access to the detailed pricing breakdown of this specific ELA and comparable data from other federal sources. Ideally, this would involve benchmarking against GSA Schedule 70 (now Polaris GWAC) pricing for Microsoft software, or against other agency-specific Microsoft ELAs that have undergone competitive bidding. The fact that this was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' suggests it might not have been subjected to the same level of price scrutiny as a fully competed contract. A thorough value assessment would necessitate obtaining and analyzing this detailed pricing information.

What specific justification was provided for not competing this ELA renewal more broadly, given its substantial value?

The provided data states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP,' which implies it may have been awarded under other transaction authorities or justifications for other than full and open competition. Common reasons for limited competition on renewals include proprietary software rights, unique integration requirements, or specific performance needs that only one contractor can meet. However, for a significant software renewal like this, a detailed justification document should exist within the Department of Justice's procurement file, outlining why a broader competition was not feasible or advantageous. Without access to this justification, the rationale remains unclear.

What is the total historical spending by the Department of Justice on Microsoft Enterprise License Agreements over the past five fiscal years?

To determine the total historical spending on Microsoft ELAs by the Department of Justice over the past five fiscal years, a comprehensive search of federal procurement data (e.g., FPDS-NG) would be required. This would involve filtering by agency (DOJ), keywords related to 'Microsoft Enterprise License Agreement' or similar terms, and specific fiscal years. Summing the award amounts for all identified ELA contracts would provide the total historical spending. This analysis is crucial for understanding spending trends, identifying potential increases or decreases in ELA costs, and contextualizing the current $85.9 million renewal.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success and value of this Microsoft ELA renewal for the Department of Justice?

The success and value of this Microsoft ELA renewal are typically measured through a combination of technical and administrative Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Technically, this could include metrics like software uptime, availability of support services, response times for technical issues, and successful deployment of new software versions. Administratively, KPIs might focus on adherence to the contract terms, timely delivery of licenses and support, and user satisfaction surveys. The firm-fixed-price nature implies that the contractor is responsible for meeting these performance standards to receive full payment.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - APLLICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10113 MINBURN ST, GREAT FALLS, VA, 22066

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $85,905,182

Exercised Options: $85,905,182

Current Obligation: $85,905,182

Actual Outlays: $85,905,182

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 15JPSS20G00000304

IDV Type: BOA

Timeline