Leidos Inc. awarded $11.2M EPA contract for regulatory enforcement support, highlighting long-term IT consulting needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,235,177 ($11.2M)

Contractor: Leidos, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2004-09-13

End Date: 2009-11-30

Contract Duration: 1,904 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ENFORCEMENT AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE OFFICE OF REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT

Place of Performance

Location: RESTON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20191

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $11.2 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: ENFORCEMENT AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE OFFICE OF REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 1904 days indicates a significant, long-term need for these services. 3. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type may present cost control challenges if not managed diligently. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541620 points to environmental consulting services. 5. The contract was awarded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a key federal agency. 6. The contract's value of over $11 million suggests a substantial investment in regulatory support. 7. The contract was awarded in 2004, reflecting historical spending patterns for EPA's enforcement needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $11.2 million over approximately five years averages to about $2.2 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar IT and environmental consulting contracts for federal agencies is challenging without more specific service details. However, the CPFF structure can sometimes lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if cost efficiencies are not rigorously pursued by the contractor and overseen by the agency. The lack of detailed performance metrics makes a definitive value-for-money assessment difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific requirement. While full and open competition is generally preferred, the number of bidders can influence price discovery. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from the potential for competitive pricing inherent in a full and open competition. However, with only two bids, the price may not have been as aggressively driven down as it might have been with more offers.

Public Impact

The Office of Regulatory Enforcement within the EPA benefits from enhanced technical and enforcement support. Services delivered likely include analysis, data management, and technical assistance related to environmental regulations. The geographic impact is national, supporting EPA's nationwide regulatory mission. Workforce implications include support for EPA's internal staff and potentially specialized contractor personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the environmental consulting services sector, a subset of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector is crucial for government agencies tasked with environmental protection and regulation. Spending in this area supports compliance, monitoring, and enforcement activities. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing IT and consulting services procured by other regulatory agencies for similar support functions.

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 impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. Large prime contractors like Leidos, Inc. may engage small businesses as subcontractors, but this is not mandated by the contract's structure as presented.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Environmental Protection Agency's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are typically embedded within the contract's terms, including performance standards, reporting requirements, and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement databases like FPDS-NG (where this data originates). Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

environmental-consulting, it-support, regulatory-enforcement, environmental-protection-agency, leidos-inc, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, professional-services, federal-contract, virginia, naics-541620

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $11.2 million to LEIDOS, INC.. ENFORCEMENT AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE OFFICE OF REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-09-13. End: 2009-11-30.

What is Leidos, Inc.'s track record with the EPA and similar federal agencies for IT and environmental consulting services?

Leidos, Inc. is a major federal contractor with a substantial history of performing IT, engineering, and professional services for various government agencies, including the EPA. Their track record typically involves large-scale system integration, cybersecurity, data analytics, and mission support. For the EPA specifically, Leidos has been involved in contracts related to environmental data management, scientific computing, and regulatory support. Analyzing their past performance ratings, any past performance issues or awards on similar contracts would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and capability in delivering services like those under this contract. Their extensive experience suggests a generally strong capability, but specific contract performance reviews are necessary for a complete assessment.

How does the $11.2 million contract value compare to other EPA contracts for similar regulatory enforcement support?

The $11.2 million contract value for approximately five years of regulatory enforcement support services is a significant but not extraordinary amount for the EPA. Federal agencies often procure multi-million dollar contracts for specialized technical and consulting services to support complex regulatory missions. To benchmark effectively, one would need to compare this contract's value against other EPA contracts awarded under NAICS code 541620 (Environmental Consulting Services) or similar codes related to IT support for regulatory functions, over comparable timeframes. The EPA's total spending on such services can be in the hundreds of millions annually. This particular contract represents a portion of that spending, likely focused on a specific program or office within the EPA's enforcement division.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for environmental consulting?

The primary risk with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract is the potential for cost overruns. In a CPFF structure, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While the fee is fixed, the contractor has less incentive to control costs compared to a fixed-price contract, as increased costs do not reduce their profit margin (unless they exceed certain thresholds or violate contract terms). This can lead to the government paying more than anticipated if costs escalate. For environmental consulting, risks include unforeseen technical challenges, scope creep, or difficulties in accurately estimating labor and resource needs, all of which can drive up costs under a CPFF arrangement. Robust oversight and clear definition of allowable costs are critical to mitigate these risks.

How effective are full and open competitions with only two bidders in ensuring competitive pricing for federal contracts?

Full and open competition is designed to maximize the number of potential bidders, thereby fostering a competitive environment that ideally leads to the best value and pricing for the government. However, when only two bids are received, the level of competition is limited. While better than a sole-source award, two bidders may not exert as much downward pressure on price as three or more would. The effectiveness hinges on the nature of the requirement, the market size for the services, and the specific capabilities of the two bidders. If the market is inherently small or specialized, two bidders might represent a significant portion of the available qualified sources. In such cases, the government must carefully evaluate the proposals to ensure the price is fair and reasonable, potentially through detailed cost analysis and negotiation, rather than relying solely on the competitive process to drive down costs.

What are the historical spending patterns for environmental consulting and IT support services at the EPA?

Historical spending patterns for environmental consulting and IT support at the EPA generally show a consistent and significant investment in these areas due to the agency's core mission. The EPA relies heavily on external expertise and technological solutions to manage complex environmental data, conduct research, enforce regulations, and communicate findings. Annual spending on contracts within NAICS codes like 541620 (Environmental Consulting) and various IT service categories (e.g., 541512, 541519) often runs into hundreds of millions of dollars. This spending fluctuates based on agency priorities, budget appropriations, and specific program needs. Contracts like the one awarded to Leidos in 2004 reflect a long-standing need for specialized support that complements the agency's internal capabilities.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesEnvironmental Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ALTERNATIVE SOURCES

Solicitation ID: PRHQ0312356

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 611641312)

Address: 12100 SUNSET HILLS RD STE 1, RESTON, VA, 11

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,638,643

Exercised Options: $11,235,177

Current Obligation: $11,235,177

Timeline

Start Date: 2004-09-13

Current End Date: 2009-11-30

Potential End Date: 2009-11-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2013-09-04

More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.

View all Leidos, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Environmental Protection Agency Contracts

View all Environmental Protection Agency contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending