Department of the Army awarded $28.6M contract for consulting services to EAI Corporation, a sole-source acquisition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,606,374 ($28.6M)

Contractor: EAI Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-05-30

End Date: 2004-08-30

Contract Duration: 458 days

Daily Burn Rate: $62.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200309!000657!2100!AD13 !USA MATERIEL COMMAND ACQUISITION!DAAD1303C0042 !A!N! !N! !20030530!20040430!042217141!042217141!042217141!N!EAI CORPORATION !1308 CONTINENTAL DRIVE !ABINGDON !MD!21009!00200!025!24!ABINGDON !HARFORD !MARYLAND !+000000827160!N!N!000004842111!B541!DEFENSE STUDIES !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME!1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541690!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !N!Z!D!N!J!1!001!N!1G!Z!N!Z! ! !Y!C!N! ! ! !B!B!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ABINGDON, HARFORD County, MARYLAND, 21009

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $28.6 million to EAI CORPORATION for work described as: 200309!000657!2100!AD13 !USA MATERIEL COMMAND ACQUISITION!DAAD1303C0042 !A!N! !N! !20030530!20040430!042217141!042217141!042217141!N!EAI CORPORATION !1308 CONTINENTAL DRIVE !ABINGDON !MD!21009!00200!025!24!ABINGDON !HARFO… Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential price overruns and limited market exploration. 2. The contract duration of 458 days suggests a significant scope of work for consulting services. 3. EAI Corporation, the sole awardee, has a track record that warrants further investigation for performance and value. 4. The service category, 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services,' is broad and requires clarity on specific deliverables. 5. Geographic location of the contractor in Maryland may indicate regional focus or specific expertise. 6. The contract's value, while substantial, needs benchmarking against similar consulting services to assess value for money.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $28.6 million for approximately 15 months of service appears high without a competitive bidding process to establish a fair market price. Benchmarking against similar 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other agencies would be necessary to determine if this represents good value. The lack of competition makes it difficult to assess pricing efficiency and whether taxpayers received the best possible deal.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple potential vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the unique capabilities or qualifications required for the service. However, it limits the opportunity for price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs compared to a fully competed contract. The absence of multiple bidders means EAI Corporation was the only option considered.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can result in higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. This limits the government's ability to secure the most cost-effective solution.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary of this contract is EAI Corporation, which receives significant revenue for its consulting services. The services delivered are categorized as 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services,' implying support for complex technical or scientific endeavors within the Department of the Army. The geographic impact is primarily centered around the contractor's location in Abingdon, Maryland, and potentially any field sites where the consulting services are applied. Workforce implications include the potential employment of consultants by EAI Corporation to fulfill the contract requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and may lead to inflated costs.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source procurement.
The broad nature of 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' could mask inefficiencies or scope creep.
Contract duration of 458 days requires careful monitoring to ensure timely and effective service delivery.
Contractor's past performance and track record need thorough vetting to mitigate performance risks.

Positive Signals

Award to a single contractor can ensure specialized expertise is leveraged.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract awarded to a US-based company, supporting domestic industry.

Sector Analysis

The 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' sector is a broad category encompassing a wide range of specialized advisory and support functions. This contract likely falls within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry, which is a significant component of the US economy. Federal spending in this area often supports complex research, development, engineering, and management initiatives. Benchmarking this contract's value would require comparison to other government contracts for similar consulting expertise, considering factors like the specific technical domain and the level of expertise required.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by the 'N' for small business status. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. This suggests that the primary awardee, EAI Corporation, is likely a larger entity, and the contract's benefits may not directly flow down to the small business ecosystem through set-aside provisions or mandated subcontracting goals.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense may also conduct audits or investigations into contract performance and financial management. Transparency regarding the specific deliverables, performance metrics, and reporting requirements would be crucial for effective oversight. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides some level of cost control, but performance monitoring remains essential.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Consulting Services
Scientific and Technical Support Services
Professional Services Contracts
Army Acquisition Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source procurement
Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing
Unspecified service details

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $28.6 million to EAI CORPORATION. 200309!000657!2100!AD13 !USA MATERIEL COMMAND ACQUISITION!DAAD1303C0042 !A!N! !N! !20030530!20040430!042217141!042217141!042217141!N!EAI CORPORATION !1308 CONTINENTAL DRIVE !ABINGDON !MD!21009!00200!025!24!ABINGDON !HARFORD !MARYLAND !+000000827160!N!N!000004842111!B541!DEFENSE STUDIES !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME!1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541690!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is EAI 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 $28.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-05-30. End: 2004-08-30.

What specific scientific and technical consulting services were provided under this contract?

The contract identifies the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as 541690, which corresponds to 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services.' This is a broad category that can encompass a wide array of specialized services, including but not limited to engineering consulting, scientific research support, environmental consulting, and management consulting related to technical operations. Without further details from the contract's statement of work or performance reports, the precise nature of the services rendered remains unspecified. This lack of specificity makes it challenging to assess the contract's direct impact or the value derived from the expenditure.

What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded as 'NOT COMPETED,' which typically signifies a sole-source or limited competition procurement. The specific justification for this sole-source award is not detailed in the provided data snippet. Common reasons for sole-source awards include the unique capabilities of a single contractor, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or when the service is only available from a single source. A thorough review of the contract file, including the Justification and Approval (J&A) document, would be necessary to understand the official rationale and assess its validity.

How does the contract value of $28.6 million compare to similar consulting services procured by the Department of Defense?

Benchmarking the $28.6 million contract value requires identifying comparable contracts for 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' awarded by the Department of Defense (DoD) or other federal agencies. Without access to a comprehensive database of historical contract data and specific service details, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for a duration of approximately 15 months (458 days), this value suggests a significant scope of work or a high level of specialized expertise required. If similar, less complex consulting services were procured at a lower cost, or if more extensive services were procured for a similar or lower price, it could indicate potential issues with the value received in this sole-source award.

What is the track record of EAI Corporation in performing government contracts, particularly those of similar size and scope?

Information regarding EAI Corporation's track record in performing government contracts is not explicitly detailed in the provided data. To assess their performance, one would need to review past contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any documented issues or successes. Given this is a sole-source award, it implies that the Army either had prior positive experience with EAI Corporation or determined they were the only entity capable of meeting the requirement. A deeper dive into their contract history would reveal their reliability, quality of service, and adherence to budget and schedule on previous engagements.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for consulting services?

Sole-source awards for consulting services carry several potential risks. Firstly, the lack of competition can lead to higher prices than might be achieved through a competitive bidding process, potentially resulting in less value for taxpayer money. Secondly, without the pressure of competition, there might be less incentive for the contractor to innovate or optimize service delivery. Thirdly, there's a risk that the government may not be aware of all available qualified vendors, potentially overlooking more capable or cost-effective solutions. Finally, sole-source awards can sometimes raise concerns about fairness and transparency in the procurement process.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 611641312)

Address: 1308 CONTINENTAL DRIVE, ABINGDON, MD, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Timeline