DOJ's $15.19M communication contract with Leidos Aspen Systems Corp. shows fair value despite limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,189,109 ($15.2M)

Contractor: Leidos Aspen Systems Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2009-09-01

End Date: 2014-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.3K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: COMMUNICATION AND PUBLICATION SUPPORT SERVICES. ALSO CORRECTED BASE AND EXERCISED OPTIONS VALUE.

Place of Performance

Location: ROCKVILLE, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20850

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $15.2 million to LEIDOS ASPEN SYSTEMS CORP for work described as: COMMUNICATION AND PUBLICATION SUPPORT SERVICES. ALSO CORRECTED BASE AND EXERCISED OPTIONS VALUE. Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar public relations services. 2. Competition was limited, raising questions about optimal price discovery for taxpayer funds. 3. The contract duration of five years suggests a stable, long-term need for these services. 4. Performance context indicates a consistent need for communication and publication support. 5. This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically public relations. 6. The use of Time and Materials pricing may introduce cost escalation risks if not managed closely.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total obligated amount of $15.19 million over five years averages to approximately $3.04 million annually. This figure seems within a reasonable range for comprehensive communication and publication support services, especially considering the scope likely involves strategic planning, content creation, and distribution. Benchmarking against similar government contracts for public relations and media support suggests that this pricing is not excessively high, though a more precise comparison would require detailed service scope data.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, but the specific details regarding the number of bidders beyond the prime contractor are not fully elaborated in the provided data. The presence of 'limited competition' suggests that while multiple entities may have been considered or solicited, the pool of qualified bidders might have been restricted, potentially due to specialized requirements or existing contract vehicles. This level of competition can sometimes lead to prices that are not as aggressively negotiated as in a full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can mean that taxpayers may not have benefited from the lowest possible prices achievable through a broader bidding process. While the award was competitive, the restricted nature of the competition might have resulted in a higher overall cost than if a wider range of vendors had participated.

Public Impact

The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) benefits from enhanced communication capabilities to disseminate information about its initiatives and research. Services delivered include communication strategy, content development, and publication support, aiding OJP's public outreach. The contract's primary geographic impact is likely within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, where federal agencies are concentrated, but its outputs have national reach. Workforce implications include support for government communication specialists and potential reliance on contractor personnel for specialized tasks.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing structure.
Limited competition may have resulted in a less favorable price for taxpayers.
Contract duration could lead to vendor lock-in if not managed proactively.

Positive Signals

Consistent award to a known entity suggests reliability and established performance.
The contract addresses a clear and ongoing need for public relations support within the DOJ.
Delivery order mechanism implies a structured procurement process within a larger framework.

Sector Analysis

The public relations industry is a vital component of the professional services sector, enabling organizations to manage their public image and communicate effectively. Government spending in this area supports agencies' needs for outreach, information dissemination, and strategic communication. This contract, valued at over $15 million, represents a significant investment in specialized communication expertise, fitting within the broader landscape of federal contracting for support services. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar government-wide contracts for public relations and advertising services would typically range from several million to tens of millions annually, depending on the agency's size and mission.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) was false, and there was no specific small business set-aside (ss) for this contract. This suggests that the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses, and larger, established firms like Leidos Aspen Systems Corp. were likely the primary focus or recipients. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. The impact on the small business ecosystem is neutral in terms of direct set-aside benefits, though larger prime contractors may still engage small businesses as subcontractors if it aligns with their strategy.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's performance work statement, requiring adherence to specific deliverables and quality standards. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement databases where contract awards are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise concerning the contract's execution or financial management.

Related Government Programs

Department of Justice Public Relations Contracts
Office of Justice Programs Communication Services
Federal Public Relations and Advertising Services
Government Communication Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to T&M pricing.
Limited competition may impact price efficiency.
Scope creep risk in T&M contracts.
Need for robust government oversight of labor hours and materials.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $15.2 million to LEIDOS ASPEN SYSTEMS CORP. COMMUNICATION AND PUBLICATION SUPPORT SERVICES. ALSO CORRECTED BASE AND EXERCISED OPTIONS VALUE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS ASPEN SYSTEMS CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Office of Justice Programs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-01. End: 2014-08-31.

What is the track record of Leidos Aspen Systems Corp. with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Justice?

Leidos Aspen Systems Corp. has a history of federal contracting, including work with various agencies. While specific details on their performance metrics for this particular DOJ contract are not provided, their ability to secure and fulfill a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract suggests a level of established capability and reliability. Further analysis would involve examining past performance reviews, any documented disputes or awards, and the breadth of their service offerings across different federal entities. Their longevity in the contracting space indicates a capacity to meet government requirements, though a deep dive into specific project outcomes would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the value of this contract compare to similar communication support contracts awarded by other federal agencies?

The total contract value of $15.19 million over five years, averaging approximately $3.04 million annually, places this contract in the mid-to-large tier for specialized communication services. When compared to similar contracts for public relations, media outreach, and publication support awarded by agencies like the Department of Defense or Health and Human Services, this value appears competitive. Larger agencies with broader public affairs mandates might award contracts in the tens of millions annually. Smaller agencies or those with more focused communication needs would likely have contracts in the low millions. Therefore, the DOJ's spending on this contract seems aligned with the scale and scope of services typically required for a major federal law enforcement and justice agency.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure used in this contract?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure is the potential for cost escalation if not managed diligently. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M contracts reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials. This can lead to unpredictable final costs, especially if project scopes creep, inefficiencies arise, or labor rates increase beyond initial projections. For the government, this necessitates robust oversight to ensure that labor hours are reasonable and necessary, and that material costs are fair and competitive. Without strong management and clear task definitions, T&M contracts can become significantly more expensive than initially anticipated.

How effective has the Office of Justice Programs been in achieving its communication goals through this contract?

Assessing the effectiveness of this contract in achieving the Office of Justice Programs' (OJP) communication goals requires specific performance metrics and outcome data that are not detailed in the provided summary. Typically, effectiveness would be measured by factors such as the reach and impact of publications, public engagement with OJP initiatives, media coverage quality, and the successful dissemination of critical information. While the contract's renewal and duration suggest a continued need and likely satisfactory performance, a definitive judgment on effectiveness would necessitate reviewing OJP's strategic communication objectives and comparing them against tangible results achieved by Leidos Aspen Systems Corp. under this agreement.

What are the historical spending patterns for communication and publication support services within the Department of Justice?

Historical spending patterns for communication and publication support services within the Department of Justice (DOJ) indicate a consistent and significant investment in these areas. Over the years, the DOJ, like other large federal agencies, has relied on contractors to manage public affairs, disseminate information, and support its various bureaus and programs. Annual spending can fluctuate based on specific initiatives, policy changes, and the overall budget allocated to public outreach. Contracts for these services often span multiple years and can range from a few million to tens of millions of dollars annually across the department, reflecting the critical need for effective communication in law enforcement and justice administration.

What is the significance of the contract being a 'Delivery Order' under a larger contract vehicle?

The designation of this award as a 'Delivery Order' signifies that it was issued under a pre-existing, larger contract vehicle, such as a Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) contract or a Government-Wide Acquisition Contract (GWAC). This procurement method allows agencies to issue task orders or delivery orders for specific services or products without conducting a full, separate competition for each individual need. It streamlines the acquisition process, often leading to faster delivery times and potentially leveraging pre-negotiated pricing. The fact that it was a 'competitive delivery order' implies that multiple vendors holding spots on the parent contract vehicle were solicited, contributing to the competitive aspect of this specific award.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Advertising, Public Relations, and Related Services › Public Relations Agencies

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.

Address: 9737 WASHINGTONIAN BLVD, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20878

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,493,401

Exercised Options: $15,493,401

Current Obligation: $15,189,109

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0192K

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline