Commerce Department's NOAA awards $51M+ contract for IT sustainment to Peraton Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $51,177,268 ($51.2M)

Contractor: Peraton Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Commerce

Start Date: 2017-09-01

End Date: 2023-02-28

Contract Duration: 2,006 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF CLASS SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT - SUSTAINING ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, IT SECURITY, SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: ASHEVILLE, BUNCOMBE County, NORTH CAROLINA, 28801

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Commerce obligated $51.2 million to PERATON INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF CLASS SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT - SUSTAINING ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, IT SECURITY, SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can incentivize cost control but also carries inherent risk. 3. The duration of the contract (2017-2023) indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541512 points to a focus on computer systems design services. 5. The contract was awarded to a single entity, Peraton Inc., highlighting potential concentration in service provision. 6. The contract value exceeds $51 million, representing a significant investment in IT sustainment. 7. The contract was awarded in North Carolina, indicating a specific geographic focus for service delivery.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure requires careful monitoring to ensure value for money. While the total award value is substantial, a detailed breakdown of costs and fee structures would be necessary for a precise value assessment. Benchmarking against similar IT sustainment contracts for agencies of NOAA's size and scope would provide further context on pricing efficiency. The absence of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to fully assess the return on investment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 8 bidders (no) suggests a reasonably competitive landscape for this type of service. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) benefits from sustained IT operations and maintenance, crucial for its scientific and environmental missions. Services delivered include sustaining engineering, operations, maintenance, IT security, systems engineering, and project management. The contract's geographic impact is centered in North Carolina, where the services are likely performed or managed. The contract supports a workforce involved in critical IT infrastructure management and security for a key federal agency.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT services sector, specifically focusing on computer systems design and related services. The market for IT sustainment and managed services is highly competitive, with numerous large and small businesses offering specialized capabilities. The total federal spending on IT services is in the hundreds of billions annually, making this contract a relatively small portion of the overall IT expenditure but significant for the specific functions it supports within NOAA.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) was not a specific set-aside (false). There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though the primary award went to a large entity, Peraton Inc.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms would typically involve contract officers, program managers within NOAA, and potentially the agency's Inspector General. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Accountability measures are inherent in the contract terms, including performance requirements and the fixed fee structure. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Commerce would have jurisdiction over potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

it-services, computer-systems-design, department-of-commerce, noaa, definitive-contract, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, sustaining-engineering, it-operations, it-maintenance, it-security

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Commerce awarded $51.2 million to PERATON INC.. IGF::OT::IGF CLASS SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT - SUSTAINING ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, IT SECURITY, SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PERATON INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $51.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-09-01. End: 2023-02-28.

What is Peraton Inc.'s track record with similar government contracts, particularly within NOAA or the Department of Commerce?

Peraton Inc. has a significant history of performing IT and mission support services for various U.S. government agencies, including defense, intelligence, and civilian sectors. Their portfolio often includes complex systems integration, cybersecurity, and sustainment services. While specific details on their performance with NOAA prior to this contract would require deeper data mining, Peraton is generally recognized as a major federal contractor with extensive experience. Their track record often involves managing large-scale, long-term contracts, suggesting they possess the organizational capacity and technical expertise required for services like those outlined in the IGF contract. However, like any large contractor, they may have faced scrutiny or performance reviews on specific contracts, which would be detailed in agency performance databases.

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

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure is common for complex projects where the scope may evolve or is not fully defined at the outset, such as IT sustainment. It allows the contractor to recover all allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee, which represents their profit. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility for the government if requirements change, but it carries a higher risk of cost growth if not managed tightly. Compared to Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF), CPFF provides less direct incentive for the contractor to control costs beyond avoiding disallowed expenses, as the fee is fixed regardless of the final cost. For stable, well-defined IT sustainment, FFP might offer better price certainty, but CPFF can be appropriate when technical uncertainties are significant.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract, and how has Peraton Inc. performed against them?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, for IT sustainment contracts, KPIs would include metrics such as system uptime/availability, response times for incident resolution, patch management compliance, cybersecurity vulnerability remediation rates, and project completion timelines. Performance against these KPIs is usually documented in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports. Without access to CPARS data for this specific contract, it is impossible to definitively state how Peraton Inc. has performed. However, the renewal or continuation of such a long-term contract often suggests satisfactory performance, though it does not preclude areas for improvement.

What is the historical spending trend for IT sustainment services by NOAA, and how does this contract fit within that trend?

Historical spending data for NOAA's IT sustainment services would reveal trends in their investment in maintaining and operating IT infrastructure. This $51M+ contract, spanning from 2017 to 2023, represents a significant, multi-year commitment. Analyzing NOAA's spending in prior years (e.g., before 2017) and subsequent years would indicate whether this contract amount is consistent with their typical investment levels, or if it represents an increase or decrease in funding for these services. Factors influencing trends could include technological upgrades, changes in mission requirements, or budget allocations. Understanding this context helps assess if the current spending level is appropriate and sustainable for NOAA's operational needs.

Are there any identified risks associated with Peraton Inc. as a contractor, such as past performance issues or financial stability concerns?

Assessing risks associated with Peraton Inc. requires reviewing their performance history across all government contracts, not just this specific one. Databases like CPARS provide ratings on past performance, management, cost control, and schedule adherence. Financial stability can be assessed through various business intelligence tools and reports. While Peraton is a large, established company, any contractor of its size may have faced challenges on specific projects. Without direct access to detailed performance reviews or financial health reports for Peraton related to this contract period, a definitive risk assessment is limited. However, the fact that they were awarded and performed under this significant contract suggests they met the government's initial vetting criteria.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesComputer Systems Design and Related ServicesComputer Systems Design Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: SP133E17RP0226

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 950 N GLEBE RD STE 1100, ARLINGTON, VA, 22203

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $58,450,198

Exercised Options: $53,997,784

Current Obligation: $51,177,268

Actual Outlays: $2,274,998

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2017-09-01

Current End Date: 2023-02-28

Potential End Date: 2023-02-28 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-09-10

More Contracts from Peraton Inc.

View all Peraton Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Commerce Contracts

View all Department of Commerce contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending