Leidos Aspen Systems Corp awarded $42M contract by Department of Education for unspecified services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $42,079,521 ($42.1M)

Contractor: Leidos Aspen Systems Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Education

Start Date: 1999-12-15

End Date: 1998-03-09

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20202

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Education obligated $42.1 million to LEIDOS ASPEN SYSTEMS CORP for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value of $42M suggests a significant scope of work, requiring careful performance monitoring. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating a potentially competitive pricing environment. 3. The long duration of the contract (awarded in 1998, ending in 1999) may indicate a need for ongoing services. 4. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts performance risk to the contractor, potentially leading to cost efficiencies if managed well. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests the primary contractor is not a small business, and subcontracting opportunities are not explicitly mandated. 6. The contract's focus on the District of Columbia may have implications for local workforce and economic impact.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $42,079,521.05 is substantial, but without specific service details, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar contracts for unspecified services is difficult. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests the government has a defined cost, but the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. Further analysis would require understanding the deliverables and market rates for those specific services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' suggesting that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This typically leads to a more robust price discovery process and potentially better pricing for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios. The presence of two bidders, as indicated by 'no': 2, suggests some level of competition, though the exact number of proposals received and their quality would provide a clearer picture of the competitive intensity.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a market where contractors compete on both price and quality, aiming to secure the government's business. This process helps ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging innovation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary appears to be the Department of Education, which receives services essential for its operations. The specific services delivered are not detailed in the provided data, making it difficult to ascertain the exact public benefit. The contract's geographic focus is the District of Columbia, suggesting potential impacts on the local economy and workforce. Workforce implications could include job creation within the District of Columbia, particularly if the services require specialized skills.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The IT sector, where Leidos is a major player, often sees large, complex contracts. However, the provided data does not specify the sector for this particular award. If this contract falls within IT services, it would be part of a vast federal IT spending landscape. Without knowing the specific services, it's hard to benchmark against comparable contracts, but federal IT spending often runs into billions annually across various agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses ('sb': false). This means the primary award went to a large business, Leidos Aspen Systems Corp. There is no explicit information on subcontracting requirements, so the extent to which small businesses may benefit indirectly through subcontracts is unknown. This could represent a missed opportunity for small business participation if subcontracting goals were not established.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of Education's contracting officers and potentially program managers responsible for monitoring performance against the contract's terms and conditions. Inspector General (IG) oversight is standard for federal contracts, providing an independent review of efficiency and integrity. Transparency would depend on the agency's policies regarding contract award details and performance reporting, which are not fully detailed here.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

department-of-education, leidos-aspen-systems-corp, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, district-of-columbia, unspecified-services, historical-contract, professional-services

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Education awarded $42.1 million to LEIDOS ASPEN SYSTEMS CORP. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS ASPEN SYSTEMS CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Education (Department of Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $42.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-12-15. End: 1998-03-09.

What specific services were provided under this $42 million contract awarded to Leidos Aspen Systems Corp by the Department of Education?

The provided data does not specify the exact services rendered under this contract. The contract value of $42,079,521.05 suggests a significant scope of work, but without details on the nature of the services (e.g., IT support, consulting, administrative functions, research), it is impossible to assess the contract's effectiveness or value for money. Further investigation into the Department of Education's contract databases or public records would be necessary to identify the specific deliverables and objectives of this award.

How does the $42 million contract value compare to typical spending by the Department of Education for similar services?

Without knowing the specific services this $42 million contract covers, a direct comparison to typical Department of Education spending is not feasible. Federal agencies procure a wide range of services, from IT infrastructure and software development to educational research and administrative support, each with vastly different cost structures. If this contract was for IT services, it might be within the typical range for large-scale projects. However, if it was for a more niche or administrative function, it could be considered high. Benchmarking requires identifying comparable contract types and scopes of work within the agency or across similar federal departments.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Leidos Aspen Systems Corp's performance on this contract?

The provided data does not include information on the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Leidos Aspen Systems Corp's performance. For a firm-fixed-price contract, performance is typically assessed against the defined scope of work, delivery schedules, and quality standards outlined in the contract. The Department of Education's contracting officer would be responsible for monitoring these aspects. Without access to the contract's statement of work and performance reports, a detailed assessment of performance quality and adherence to metrics is not possible.

What is the track record of Leidos Aspen Systems Corp with the Department of Education and other federal agencies?

Leidos Aspen Systems Corp, as part of the larger Leidos entity, has a substantial history of contracting with various U.S. federal agencies, including the Department of Education. While this specific contract data is limited, Leidos is a well-established government contractor known for providing a wide range of services, often in areas like IT, defense, and intelligence. Their overall track record involves numerous large-scale contracts. A comprehensive review would require examining past performance evaluations, contract awards, and any reported issues or successes across their federal portfolio to fully understand their reliability and capability.

Given the contract was awarded in 1998 and ended in 1999, what does this historical spending pattern suggest about the Department of Education's needs at that time?

A contract awarded in 1998 and ending in 1999 for $42 million suggests the Department of Education had a significant requirement for services during that period. The firm-fixed-price nature indicates a defined scope and budget. Without knowing the service area, it's speculative, but it could relate to major IT system upgrades, large-scale data management projects, or significant policy implementation efforts that were planned and executed within that timeframe. This level of spending points to a substantial operational or strategic initiative requiring external support.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)

Address: 2277 RESEARCH BLVD, ROCKVILLE, MD, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $62,720,298

Exercised Options: $62,720,298

Current Obligation: $42,079,521

Timeline

Start Date: 1999-12-15

Current End Date: 1998-03-09

Potential End Date: 1998-03-09 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2011-10-24

More Contracts from Leidos Aspen Systems Corp

View all Leidos Aspen Systems Corp federal contracts →

Other Department of Education Contracts

View all Department of Education contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending