GSA's $150M Engineering Services Contract with CACI NSS, LLC Shows Strong Competition and Long Duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $150,363,417 ($150.4M)

Contractor: CACI NSS, LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2018-09-07

End Date: 2024-03-06

Contract Duration: 2,007 days

Daily Burn Rate: $74.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PM MC SETA SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Place of Performance

Location: RESTON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20190

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $150.4 million to CACI NSS, LLC for work described as: PM MC SETA SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process. 2. Long contract duration of over 2000 days suggests a sustained need for services. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. Engineering services are critical for government operations, supporting complex technical requirements. 5. The significant dollar value points to a major program requiring extensive technical expertise. 6. Virginia is a key hub for federal contracting, particularly in IT and engineering services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $150 million over its period of performance is substantial. Benchmarking against similar engineering services contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, the use of a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while common for complex R&D or services where costs are uncertain, carries inherent risks of cost escalation. The fixed fee component provides some incentive for the contractor to control costs, but the overall value proposition depends heavily on the effective management of direct costs by the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 3 bidders indicates a healthy level of competition for this significant engineering services requirement. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and ensures the government receives proposals from multiple qualified vendors, potentially leading to better pricing and innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces and encouraging a wider pool of contractors to offer their best value propositions.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring specialized engineering and technical assistance benefit from the expertise provided. The contract supports the development and implementation of complex government systems and projects. Workforce implications include employment for engineers, technical specialists, and support staff. Geographic impact is primarily centered in Virginia, a hub for federal contracting and technical services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Long contract durations may reduce flexibility to adapt to changing technological needs.
The specific nature of 'SETA' services can sometimes lack clear performance metrics.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing and vendor selection.
The contract has a long performance period, indicating sustained demand and successful service delivery.
Engineering services are crucial for complex government projects, ensuring technical proficiency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a significant segment of the federal market supporting a wide array of government functions. The federal government is a major consumer of engineering services, spending billions annually across various agencies for everything from infrastructure design to complex system development. This contract, valued at over $150 million, represents a substantial investment in specialized technical expertise, likely supporting critical national security or operational requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific sub-discipline of engineering and the agency's mission.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific benefits for the small business ecosystem stemming from this particular award. Large prime contractors like CACI NSS, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors on such large contracts, but this is not guaranteed or mandated by the contract terms provided.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) typically employs robust oversight mechanisms for its contracts, including performance monitoring, financial reviews, and contract administration. The Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) within GSA is responsible for managing many of these large contracts. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or identified during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA)
Engineering Services
Professional Services Contracts
General Services Administration Contracts
Cost-Plus Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF contract type.
Risk of technological obsolescence over the long contract duration.
Need for diligent government oversight to ensure performance and value.
Limited transparency on specific service deliverables without the SOW.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $150.4 million to CACI NSS, LLC. PM MC SETA SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CACI NSS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $150.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-09-07. End: 2024-03-06.

What is the specific nature of the 'Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance' (SETA) services provided under this contract?

Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) services typically involve providing specialized expertise to support government program management, system design, integration, testing, and lifecycle management. For this contract with CACI NSS, LLC, awarded by GSA, the SETA services likely encompass a broad range of technical advisory and support functions. This could include areas like requirements analysis, acquisition support, risk management, independent verification and validation, and strategic planning for complex government systems. The exact scope would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), which is not provided here. The CPFF contract type suggests that the specific tasks and their associated costs may not have been fully defined at the outset, requiring close government oversight to ensure the services align with program objectives and deliver value.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure compare to other contract types for similar engineering services?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or involves significant uncertainty, such as research and development or complex system integration. In this case, the government agrees to pay the contractor's allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility for the government to adapt to evolving requirements but carries a higher risk of cost overruns, as the contractor is reimbursed for actual costs incurred. Other types like Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) introduce performance incentives. For well-defined engineering services, FFP contracts are generally preferred by the government as they provide greater cost certainty and transfer risk to the contractor. The choice of CPFF here suggests the services were complex and potentially evolving.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract duration of over 2000 days for engineering services?

A contract duration exceeding 2000 days (over 5.5 years) for engineering services presents several potential risks. Firstly, technological obsolescence is a significant concern; the systems or technologies the engineering services support may evolve rapidly, rendering the original scope of work or the contractor's expertise less relevant over time. Secondly, long durations can lead to 'contractor lock-in,' making it difficult and costly to switch providers even if performance issues arise or better solutions become available. Thirdly, maintaining consistent quality and performance from the contractor over such an extended period requires continuous and diligent government oversight. Finally, the cost structure, especially if it's a cost-reimbursable type, can escalate significantly over a long period if not tightly managed, potentially exceeding initial budget expectations.

Given the $150M value and full and open competition, what does this imply about the market for these specific engineering services?

The substantial $150 million value and the fact that this contract was awarded through full and open competition with three bidders suggest a mature and competitive market for the specific engineering services required. A high dollar value indicates a significant and ongoing need within the government, attracting multiple capable large businesses to compete. The presence of three bidders signifies that the market is not dominated by a single provider and that there are at least a few companies with the necessary technical expertise, capacity, and security clearances to undertake such a large-scale effort. This level of competition is generally positive for the government, as it allows for price negotiation and selection of the best technical approach among qualified vendors.

What is CACI NSS, LLC's track record with government contracts, particularly with GSA?

CACI NSS, LLC, is a subsidiary of CACI International Inc., a well-established government contractor with a long history of providing IT, engineering, and professional services to various federal agencies. CACI International has consistently secured large contracts across defense, intelligence, and civilian sectors. While specific performance data for CACI NSS, LLC on this particular GSA contract isn't detailed here, the parent company's extensive experience and significant contract awards suggest a generally strong track record. Government contract databases often contain past performance information, which would have been reviewed during the procurement process. CACI's size and market presence indicate they are a significant player capable of managing complex, high-value contracts.

How does the 'Engineering Services' category (NAICS 541330) spending compare across different federal agencies?

Spending within the 'Engineering Services' category (NAICS 541330) varies significantly across federal agencies, reflecting their distinct missions and operational needs. The Department of Defense (DoD) is typically the largest consumer, utilizing these services for weapons system development, infrastructure, and research. Other major spenders include the Department of Transportation (for infrastructure projects like highways and aviation), the Department of Energy (for research, nuclear facilities, and energy infrastructure), NASA (for space exploration and aeronautics research), and the General Services Administration (GSA) itself, which procures engineering services for government-wide support and facility management. Agencies focused on infrastructure, defense, and scientific research will naturally have higher expenditures in this category compared to agencies with primarily administrative or regulatory functions.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: ID03170053001

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Systemware, Inc.

Address: 12021 SUNSET HILLS RD, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $180,778,211

Exercised Options: $177,809,493

Current Obligation: $150,363,417

Actual Outlays: $-26,923

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 13

Total Subaward Amount: $15,755,249

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU121

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline