DOJ's $103M NIBIN contract to Ultra Electronics awarded without competition, raising value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $103,158,609 ($103.2M)

Contractor: Ultra Electronics Forensic Technology Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2013-11-18

End Date: 2019-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,959 days

Daily Burn Rate: $52.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF FOR CRITICAL FUNCTIONS - NIBIN SERVICES, SOFTWARE, AND EQUIPMENT

Place of Performance

Location: NEW YORK, NEW YORK County, NEW YORK, 10038

State: New York Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $103.2 million to ULTRA ELECTRONICS FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY INC. for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF FOR CRITICAL FUNCTIONS - NIBIN SERVICES, SOFTWARE, AND EQUIPMENT Key points: 1. The contract's value for money is questionable due to the lack of competition and a significant price increase over its duration. 2. Competition dynamics were absent, as the contract was awarded on a sole-source basis. 3. Risk indicators include the sole-source award and potential for price creep over the contract's extended period. 4. Performance context shows a long contract duration (1959 days) for software and equipment services. 5. Sector positioning places this within professional, scientific, and technical services, specifically related to forensic technology.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total award amount of $103,158,608.87 over nearly five years suggests a substantial investment. Without competitive bidding, it is difficult to benchmark the value for money. The contract's duration and the nature of the services (software and equipment) could lead to significant price increases over time, especially if technology evolves rapidly. The lack of comparative data from other similar contracts awarded competitively makes a precise value assessment challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning there was no open competition. This typically occurs when a specific vendor possesses unique capabilities or proprietary technology essential for the requirement. The absence of multiple bidders means that price discovery through market forces was not utilized, potentially leading to a higher price than if competition had been present.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for this service due to the lack of competitive pressure to drive down costs. The government did not benefit from the potential cost savings that often arise from a competitive bidding process.

Public Impact

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is the primary beneficiary, utilizing NIBIN services, software, and equipment. The services delivered are critical for functions related to firearms tracing and crime gun intelligence. The geographic impact is national, supporting law enforcement efforts across the United States. Workforce implications include providing law enforcement agencies with tools to investigate firearms-related crimes.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in inflated pricing.
Sole-source award limits opportunities for other vendors and innovation.
Long contract duration could lead to outdated technology or increased maintenance costs.
Potential for scope creep without competitive oversight.

Positive Signals

The contract supports critical law enforcement functions for the ATF.
Ultra Electronics is a specialized provider in forensic technology.
The contract duration suggests a long-term need for these services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on forensic technology and data analysis for law enforcement. The market for such specialized services can be niche, with a limited number of providers possessing the required expertise and technology. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more information on the specific NIBIN system and its components, but government spending on forensic and investigative technology has been increasing.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included small business set-asides. As a sole-source award to a large corporation, it did not directly benefit small businesses through prime contract awards. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses are not detailed in the provided data, but are unlikely to be a significant focus given the nature of the award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the agency's program management. Accountability measures are inherent in contract performance clauses. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the proprietary aspects of the technology. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

NIBIN Program
Forensic Science Services
Law Enforcement Technology
Firearms Tracing Systems
Criminal Justice Information Systems

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for price inflation
Long contract duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $103.2 million to ULTRA ELECTRONICS FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY INC.. IGF::CT::IGF FOR CRITICAL FUNCTIONS - NIBIN SERVICES, SOFTWARE, AND EQUIPMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ULTRA ELECTRONICS FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Acquisition and Property Management Division).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $103.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-11-18. End: 2019-03-31.

What is the historical spending trend for NIBIN services and equipment provided by Ultra Electronics?

The provided data covers a single definitive contract awarded in 2013 with an end date in 2019, totaling approximately $103 million. To assess historical spending trends, one would need to examine prior contracts with Ultra Electronics or other vendors for similar NIBIN services, as well as subsequent contracts awarded after March 2019. Without this broader context, it's impossible to determine if this $103 million award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of spending for this capability over time. Analyzing the contract's modification history could also reveal changes in spending during its performance period.

How does the per-unit cost of NIBIN software licenses or equipment compare to market rates or similar government contracts?

Benchmarking the per-unit cost is challenging without specific details on the software licenses, equipment models, and quantities procured under this $103 million contract. As a sole-source award, direct price comparisons to competitively procured contracts are not feasible. To perform such an analysis, one would need access to the contract's line item details and compare them against publicly available pricing for similar forensic technology solutions from other vendors, or against historical pricing data for the same or comparable items if procured competitively by other agencies. The lack of competition inherently limits the ability to assess if the government received a fair market price.

What is Ultra Electronics' track record with the Department of Justice and other federal agencies regarding performance and compliance?

Ultra Electronics Forensic Technology Inc. has a history of providing NIBIN services and related technologies to the ATF and potentially other law enforcement agencies. Assessing their overall track record would require a review of past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any past performance issues, contract disputes, or audit findings associated with their federal contracts. While this specific contract was sole-source, their ability to secure such a contract suggests a level of established capability and potentially satisfactory past performance. A deeper dive into CPARS data and any publicly available IG reports related to their contracts would provide a more comprehensive view.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the effectiveness of the NIBIN system and Ultra Electronics' services?

The effectiveness of the NIBIN system and Ultra Electronics' services would likely be measured by KPIs related to the system's uptime, data accuracy, processing speed, user satisfaction, and its contribution to firearms investigations and prosecutions. Specific metrics might include the number of hits generated (potential links between firearms and crime scenes), the time taken to process ballistics information, and the successful utilization of NIBIN data by law enforcement agencies in solving cases. The contract itself should outline these performance standards and the methods for measuring them. Without access to the contract's SOW and performance metrics, a precise assessment is not possible.

Were there any attempts to compete this requirement in the past, and if so, why did they fail?

The provided data indicates this specific contract (awarded in 2013) was a sole-source acquisition. This implies that prior to this award, the agency likely determined that competition was not feasible or practical. Reasons for sole-source awards can include the existence of a proprietary technology, a lack of market availability, or urgent and compelling needs where only one source could meet the requirement. To understand if prior competitive attempts failed, one would need to research the contract's justification for other than full and open competition (JOFOC) documentation, or agency acquisition planning records preceding this award.

What is the potential impact of this sole-source award on future innovation and competition in the forensic technology market for law enforcement?

Sole-source awards, especially for significant dollar amounts and long durations, can stifle innovation and reduce future competition. When a single vendor is guaranteed a large contract without facing competitive pressure, there is less incentive for them to innovate aggressively or reduce prices. Furthermore, it can create barriers to entry for new or smaller companies seeking to offer competing solutions, as they may not have the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities or gain a foothold in the market. This can lead to vendor lock-in and potentially higher long-term costs for the government if the incumbent's technology becomes outdated or overpriced.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: DJA-13-AHDQ-R-0015

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Undersea Sensor Systems Inc (UEI: 349084822)

Address: 5757 BOUL CAVENDISH BUREAU 200, COTE SAINT-LUC

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Foreign Owned, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $103,158,609

Exercised Options: $103,158,609

Current Obligation: $103,158,609

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline