DOT's Maritime Administration awarded $30.9M for IT infrastructure management to Actionet Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,912,114 ($30.9M)

Contractor: Actionet Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2013-11-30

End Date: 2019-05-29

Contract Duration: 2,006 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SERVICE FOR ADMINISTRATION AND MONITORING OF NETWORK AND SERVER INFRASTRUCTURE BETWEEN MARAD HQ, USMMA, THE MARAD DATA CENTER LOCATED IN STENNIS, MS AND ALL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) SOLUTIONS, PROCESSES, AND PROCEDURES NECESSARY TO SUSTAIN IT SYSTEMS WITHIN THE MARAD ENTERPRISE. IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: GREAT NECK, NASSAU County, NEW YORK, 11024

State: New York Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $30.9 million to ACTIONET INC for work described as: CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SERVICE FOR ADMINISTRATION AND MONITORING OF NETWORK AND SERVER INFRASTRUCTURE BETWEEN MARAD HQ, USMMA, THE MARAD DATA CENTER LOCATED IN STENNIS, MS AND ALL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) SOLUTIONS, PROCESSES, AND PROCEDURES NECESSARY TO SUSTAIN IT SYST… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on network and server administration for MARAD HQ, USMMA, and Stennis Data Center. 2. The contract value of $30.9M over approximately six years suggests a significant investment in IT stability. 3. Competition was conducted under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' indicating a specific justification for limiting bidders. 4. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 5. Performance period spans from late 2013 to mid-2019, covering a substantial duration for IT services. 6. The primary service category is Computer Facilities Management Services, crucial for maintaining operational IT systems.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $30.9 million over roughly six years averages to about $5.15 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar IT infrastructure management contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, for a federal agency's core network and server administration, this annual spend appears within a reasonable range, assuming comprehensive support is provided. The firm fixed-price nature suggests the government sought predictable costs, but it's essential to ensure the contractor's pricing reflects efficient service delivery and market rates for comparable private sector services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This procurement method implies that while the competition was intended to be open, specific circumstances led to the exclusion of certain potential sources. The exact reasons for this exclusion are not detailed in the provided data. A limited competition, even if initially open, can potentially reduce the number of competitive bids received, which might impact price discovery and potentially lead to higher prices compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may face higher costs due to a reduced pool of potential bidders. The justification for excluding sources needs to be robust to ensure fair market value was obtained.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Maritime Administration (MARAD) and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA), ensuring their IT systems are operational. Services delivered include the administration and monitoring of critical network and server infrastructure. The geographic impact is centered around MARAD HQ, USMMA facilities, and the MARAD Data Center in Stennis, MS. This contract supports the IT workforce responsible for maintaining and managing these essential government systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for reduced competition due to 'exclusion of sources' could impact cost-effectiveness.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the quality and efficiency of services provided.
The duration of the contract (approx. 6 years) requires ongoing vigilance to ensure continued value and adaptation to evolving IT needs.
Firm Fixed Price contracts can sometimes lead to scope creep issues if not managed carefully.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially leading to budget certainty.
The contract covers essential IT infrastructure management, crucial for the operational continuity of MARAD and USMMA.
A defined performance period provides a clear timeframe for service delivery and evaluation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT services sector, specifically focusing on computer facilities management. The market for such services is vast and competitive, encompassing network administration, server maintenance, data center operations, and cybersecurity. Federal agencies like MARAD represent a significant segment of this market. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the average cost per server managed, per network port supported, or per data center square foot, adjusted for complexity and geographic location. The $30.9M award over six years suggests a substantial, ongoing need for reliable IT infrastructure support within the agency.

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 or specific benefits for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. The primary contractor, Actionet Inc., is likely a mid-to-large-sized business given the contract value. The absence of small business participation goals means that opportunities for small businesses to engage in subcontracting on this specific contract are not mandated by the contract's structure.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration. Performance monitoring, invoice review, and ensuring compliance with contract terms are key oversight functions. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any investigations into fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract were initiated by the DOT OIG.

Related Government Programs

Federal IT Infrastructure Management Contracts
Network and Server Administration Services
Data Center Operations Support
Maritime Administration IT Services
USMMA IT Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Potential for cost inefficiencies in a fixed-price contract without strong performance oversight.
Cybersecurity risks inherent in managing critical network infrastructure.
Dependence on a single contractor for essential IT operations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $30.9 million to ACTIONET INC. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SERVICE FOR ADMINISTRATION AND MONITORING OF NETWORK AND SERVER INFRASTRUCTURE BETWEEN MARAD HQ, USMMA, THE MARAD DATA CENTER LOCATED IN STENNIS, MS AND ALL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) SOLUTIONS, PROCESSES, AND PROCEDURES NECESSARY TO SUSTAIN IT SYSTEMS WITHIN THE MARAD ENTERPRISE. IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ACTIONET INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Maritime Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-11-30. End: 2019-05-29.

What is the track record of Actionet Inc. in performing similar federal IT infrastructure management contracts?

Actionet Inc. has a history of performing IT services for federal agencies. Reviewing their past performance on contracts with similar scope, such as network administration, server management, and data center support, is crucial. Analyzing past contract awards, performance evaluations (if publicly available), and any past performance issues or commendations would provide insight into their capabilities and reliability. For this specific contract, understanding if they successfully met all performance requirements, managed costs effectively, and adhered to schedules would be key indicators of their track record in delivering complex IT infrastructure solutions.

How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar federal IT infrastructure management contracts?

The contract's average annual cost is approximately $5.15 million ($30.9M / ~6 years). To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against contracts for similar services (network, server, data center management) awarded by agencies of comparable size and complexity. Factors like the number of users supported, servers managed, geographic locations covered, and the specific service level agreements (SLAs) must be considered. Without these granular details, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for a federal agency's core IT infrastructure, this annual spend is not inherently excessive but warrants scrutiny against peer contracts to ensure value for money.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?

Key risks include potential underperformance by the contractor leading to IT system disruptions, cost overruns (though mitigated by FFP), and cybersecurity vulnerabilities. The 'exclusion of sources' procurement method also presents a risk of reduced competition impacting price. Mitigation strategies would typically involve robust performance monitoring by the COR, clear SLAs, regular security audits, and potentially contingency planning for service disruptions. The FFP structure shifts cost risk to Actionet Inc., but the government still bears the risk of service quality and security.

How effective has the IT infrastructure managed under this contract been in supporting MARAD's mission objectives?

Assessing the effectiveness requires looking beyond the contract award data to MARAD's operational performance and IT system uptime/reliability metrics during the contract period (2013-2019). If MARAD's critical functions, such as vessel management, training, and administrative operations, were consistently supported by stable and secure IT systems, the contract was likely effective. Conversely, any significant IT outages, data breaches, or failures to support key agency initiatives would indicate potential ineffectiveness. This requires qualitative assessment of system performance and user satisfaction.

What were the historical spending patterns for similar IT infrastructure services at MARAD prior to this contract?

Understanding historical spending provides context for the $30.9M award. If MARAD previously spent similar amounts annually on IT infrastructure management, this contract represents a continuation of established investment levels. If spending was significantly lower, it might indicate an expansion of services or a shift in strategy. Analyzing prior contracts for network, server, and data center support would reveal trends in IT investment, contractor choices, and potential changes in service scope or cost over time, helping to evaluate if the current spending is justified.

What is the significance of the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procurement method for this contract?

This method implies that the agency initially intended a broad competition but then excluded certain sources based on specific justifications (e.g., sole-source justification for a specific technology, national security concerns, or prior contract performance). While aiming for openness, the exclusion inherently limits the competitive pool. The significance lies in understanding *why* sources were excluded. If the exclusion was well-justified and the remaining competition was robust, it could still yield good value. However, if the justification was weak, it raises concerns about potential price inflation and reduced market responsiveness for taxpayers.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Facilities Management 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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2600 PARK TOWER DR STE 1000, VIENNA, VA, 22180

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $43,482,877

Exercised Options: $30,912,114

Current Obligation: $30,912,114

Actual Outlays: $233,669

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTOS5909D00467

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline