DOJ's $60M IT Help Desk Contract Awarded to AAC Inc. for Computer Systems Design Services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $59,867,574 ($59.9M)

Contractor: AAC Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2011-05-25

End Date: 2016-11-23

Contract Duration: 2,009 days

Daily Burn Rate: $29.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 18

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: OCIO/IT HELP DESK

Place of Performance

Location: VIENNA, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22182

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $59.9 million to AAC INC. for work described as: OCIO/IT HELP DESK Key points: 1. Contract value of nearly $60 million over its period of performance. 2. Services procured under a full and open competition, indicating broad market engagement. 3. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order, suggesting it was part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 4. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs by shifting risk to the contractor. 5. The duration of the contract, spanning over five years, suggests a need for sustained IT support. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541512 points to a focus on computer systems design. 7. The contract was awarded to AAC Inc., a specific contractor with a defined role in providing these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract requires more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar IT help desk services procured by federal agencies. The total award of nearly $60 million over approximately five years averages to about $12 million annually. Without specific performance metrics or service level agreements, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to manage costs effectively, though it doesn't guarantee optimal pricing without competitive pressure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which implies that the solicitation was broadly advertised, and all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. The presence of 18 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensures that the government receives offers from multiple vendors, potentially leading to more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process like this generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices and encouraging innovation from multiple contractors, leading to better service delivery for the allocated funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Justice (DOJ) and its various components, which receive essential IT help desk support. Services delivered include computer systems design and related support, ensuring the smooth operation of the DOJ's IT infrastructure. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational areas of the DOJ, likely concentrated in Washington D.C. and other major federal facilities. Workforce implications include the employment of IT support personnel by AAC Inc. to fulfill the contract requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract does not accurately reflect the scope of work or if unforeseen technical challenges arise.
Risk of vendor lock-in if the services are highly specialized and difficult to transition to another provider.
Dependence on a single contractor (AAC Inc.) for critical IT support functions could pose a risk if performance degrades.
The 'after exclusion of sources' clause might warrant further investigation into why certain sources were excluded, though 'full and open' generally implies broad competition.
The duration of the contract (over 5 years) could lead to technology obsolescence if not managed proactively.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type helps to control costs and provides budget certainty for the agency.
The high number of bids (18) indicates strong competition, which typically leads to better pricing and service quality.
Awarding a Delivery Order suggests this contract was part of a pre-competed IDIQ vehicle, potentially streamlining the procurement process.
The contract's focus on computer systems design aligns with the need for robust IT infrastructure within a large federal agency.
The long-term nature of the contract (over 5 years) suggests a stable and ongoing requirement for these critical IT services.

Sector Analysis

The IT services sector, particularly computer systems design, is a significant area of federal spending. This contract falls within the broader IT services market, which is characterized by rapid technological advancements and a diverse range of providers, from large system integrators to specialized firms. Federal spending in this area often supports critical mission functions, requiring reliable and secure IT infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale IT support contracts awarded to agencies of similar size and complexity.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically tied to small business set-asides for this particular award. The primary focus appears to be on large business prime contractors capable of handling the scale and complexity of the Department of Justice's IT support needs. Any subcontracting would likely be at the discretion of the prime contractor, AAC Inc.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the program office within the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs. Accountability measures are embedded within the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to successful delivery. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

IT Help Desk Services
Computer Systems Design Services
Department of Justice IT Contracts
Federal IT Support Contracts
General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules (if applicable)
Information Technology Professional Services

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep given the long duration and nature of IT services.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical IT functions.
Need for clear performance metrics and diligent oversight.
The 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants understanding the rationale for initial exclusions.
Risk of technology obsolescence if not managed proactively.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $59.9 million to AAC INC.. OCIO/IT HELP DESK

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AAC INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $59.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-05-25. End: 2016-11-23.

What is the track record of AAC Inc. in performing similar IT help desk and computer systems design services for the federal government?

Assessing AAC Inc.'s track record requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts. This would involve examining contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any documented issues or successes. For a contract of this magnitude ($60M over 5 years), a history of successful delivery on comparable IT services contracts, particularly within large federal agencies, would be a positive indicator. Conversely, a history of poor performance, contract disputes, or significant delays could raise concerns about their capability to meet the DOJ's requirements effectively. Without specific past performance data readily available in this summary, further investigation into AAC Inc.'s contract history is recommended.

How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar IT help desk services procured by other federal agencies?

The average annual cost for this contract is approximately $12 million ($59.87M / ~5 years). To benchmark this value, one would need to compare it against IT help desk and computer systems design contracts of similar scope, complexity, and service levels awarded to other large federal agencies. Factors such as the number of users supported, hours of operation, types of services (e.g., Tier 1, 2, 3 support), and geographic distribution of support personnel significantly influence pricing. A preliminary assessment suggests this figure is within a plausible range for supporting a large federal agency's IT infrastructure, but a detailed comparison with agencies like the Department of Defense or HHS would be necessary for a definitive value-for-money conclusion.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this contract, and how are they measured?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) for this contract. Typically, IT help desk contracts include metrics such as average response time, resolution time for different ticket severities, user satisfaction ratings, and system uptime. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests that AAC Inc. is responsible for meeting these defined performance standards. The effectiveness of oversight and accountability hinges on the clarity and measurability of these KPIs/SLAs and the agency's diligence in monitoring contractor performance against them. Without this information, assessing the contract's effectiveness and value is challenging.

What is the potential impact of the 'after exclusion of sources' clause on competition and pricing?

The clause 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' is somewhat unusual. 'Full and open competition' generally means all responsible sources are allowed to compete. The 'after exclusion of sources' part suggests that prior to the full and open competition, certain sources might have been considered and then excluded, perhaps due to specific requirements or prior performance issues. While the final award was made under full and open competition with 18 bidders, the initial exclusion of sources could potentially limit the breadth of competition if not carefully justified. However, with 18 bidders, it indicates that sufficient competition was ultimately achieved, likely mitigating significant negative impacts on pricing.

How does this contract align with the Department of Justice's overall IT modernization and cybersecurity strategies?

This contract for IT help desk and computer systems design services is fundamental to the operational continuity and modernization efforts of the Department of Justice. Reliable IT support ensures that DOJ personnel can perform their duties efficiently, which is crucial for mission success. Furthermore, effective computer systems design and maintenance are prerequisites for implementing new technologies and strengthening cybersecurity postures. The contract's duration suggests a long-term commitment to maintaining and potentially upgrading the DOJ's IT infrastructure, aligning with the need for ongoing adaptation to evolving technological landscapes and threat environments.

What is the historical spending trend for IT help desk services within the Department of Justice prior to this contract?

To understand the historical spending trend, one would need to analyze prior contracts awarded by the Department of Justice for similar IT help desk and computer systems design services. This analysis would involve examining spending levels over several fiscal years, identifying the primary contractors, and noting any significant shifts in contract values or types. Understanding past spending patterns can help determine if the $59.87 million award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment in these services. It can also reveal trends in competition and pricing over time, providing context for the current contract's value and terms.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 18

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 8470 TYCO RD, VIENNA, VA, 22182

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $61,711,313

Exercised Options: $61,711,313

Current Obligation: $59,867,574

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS06F0592Z

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline