CACI Technologies awarded $178.8M for Naval Forces Logistics Support, highlighting engineering services for the Department of Defense

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $178,841,732 ($178.8M)

Contractor: CACI Technologies, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-11-30

End Date: 2022-08-20

Contract Duration: 2,089 days

Daily Burn Rate: $85.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF NAVAL FORCES LOGISTICS SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: NORFOLK, NORFOLK CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23511

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $178.8 million to CACI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF NAVAL FORCES LOGISTICS SUPPORT 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 present cost control challenges. 3. Performance period spans nearly six years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The primary service category is Engineering Services, a critical component of defense operations. 5. The award is a Delivery Order under a larger contract vehicle, typical for phased support. 6. The contractor, CACI Technologies, LLC, has a significant presence in government contracting.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $178.8 million contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contracts for similar naval logistics support. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure means the government pays the contractor's costs plus a fixed fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. While CACI is a large, established contractor, the CPFF type warrants careful monitoring to ensure value for money and prevent excessive costs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of 4 bids suggests a reasonable level of competition, which typically helps in achieving fair market prices. However, the specific details of the bidding process and the evaluation criteria would be needed to fully assess the effectiveness of this competition in driving down costs.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and innovative solutions, reducing the overall cost to the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Naval Forces, receiving essential logistics support services. Services delivered likely include planning, analysis, and management of complex logistics operations. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational areas of the U.S. Navy, potentially global. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers, logisticians, and support staff within CACI Technologies and its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize contractors to incur higher costs to increase their fee base, potentially leading to less cost efficiency.
Long contract durations (nearly 6 years) increase the risk of scope creep and potential for cost escalation over time.
Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the true value and effectiveness of the services rendered.
The engineering services category is broad; specific deliverables and their impact on operational readiness are not detailed.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
The contractor, CACI Technologies, LLC, is a well-established entity with extensive experience in government contracting.
The contract supports critical naval logistics, essential for national security operations.
The fixed fee component of the CPFF contract provides some level of cost predictability for the fee portion.

Sector Analysis

Engineering services for defense logistics represent a significant segment within the broader government contracting market. This contract falls under the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, which is a substantial part of federal spending. The market for defense logistics support is characterized by large, specialized firms capable of handling complex, long-term requirements, often competing for multi-year, high-value contracts.

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 for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. However, as a large prime contractor, CACI Technologies may engage small businesses as subcontractors for specialized services, contributing to the small business ecosystem, though this is not explicitly detailed in the award information.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure necessitates rigorous oversight to monitor costs, ensure compliance with contract terms, and verify the necessity and reasonableness of all incurred expenses. Transparency is generally maintained through regular reporting requirements from the contractor and potential audits by government agencies or the Inspector General.

Related Government Programs

Naval Logistics Modernization Programs
Defense Engineering Services Contracts
Department of the Navy IT and Support Services
CACI Technologies Government Contracts Portfolio

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
Long contract duration increases potential for scope creep and cost escalation.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Broad nature of 'Engineering Services' requires careful monitoring of deliverables.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $178.8 million to CACI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF NAVAL FORCES LOGISTICS SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CACI TECHNOLOGIES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $178.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-11-30. End: 2022-08-20.

What is the historical spending trend for CACI Technologies, LLC with the Department of the Navy for similar engineering and logistics support services?

Analyzing CACI Technologies, LLC's historical spending with the Department of the Navy for similar services requires access to comprehensive federal procurement databases. Generally, CACI is a significant contractor across various defense agencies, including the Navy, often securing large, multi-year contracts for IT, engineering, and professional services. Their track record suggests a consistent ability to win and perform on complex defense contracts. Specific trends would reveal if this $178.8 million award represents a typical award size, an increase, or a decrease in their engagement for naval logistics support compared to previous periods. Without granular historical data, it's difficult to pinpoint precise trends, but their overall profile indicates substantial and ongoing involvement in supporting naval operations.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure of this contract compare to other major naval logistics support contracts awarded recently?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure is common for complex services where the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, or where innovation is expected. Compared to other major naval logistics support contracts, CPFF awards often carry higher risk for the government regarding cost control. Fixed-Price contracts, conversely, offer greater cost certainty but may be less suitable for highly uncertain or evolving requirements. Many large-scale defense contracts utilize a mix of contract types, including Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) for well-defined services and CPFF or Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF) for research, development, or complex support where costs are harder to predict. The prevalence of CPFF for similar services would indicate industry norms, while a higher proportion of FFP contracts might suggest better-defined requirements or a stronger emphasis on cost certainty by the Navy.

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

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, for naval logistics support contracts, KPIs might include metrics such as on-time delivery rates, inventory accuracy, cost savings achieved, response times for critical support requests, and overall operational readiness improvement. Performance against these KPIs is crucial for assessing the value delivered by CACI Technologies. Without access to performance reports, contractually defined KPIs, or CACI's performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), it is impossible to definitively state how well the contractor has performed. Rigorous oversight and regular performance reviews are essential to ensure these services meet the Navy's demanding operational requirements.

What is the total federal spending on engineering services (NAICS 541330) by the Department of the Navy over the past five fiscal years?

To determine the total federal spending on engineering services (NAICS 541330) by the Department of the Navy over the past five fiscal years, one would need to query federal procurement data systems like USAspending.gov or FPDS. This data would aggregate all contracts awarded under this specific NAICS code to the Department of the Navy. Engineering services are a broad category encompassing design, consulting, and project management across various disciplines. The Navy relies heavily on these services for shipbuilding, infrastructure development, weapons systems, and operational support. Analyzing this spending trend would provide context for the $178.8 million awarded to CACI, indicating whether Navy spending in this sector is increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable, and highlight the overall investment in engineering expertise.

What is the potential risk associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type for this specific naval logistics support requirement?

The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for naval logistics support is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, where the contractor bears the risk of cost increases, CPFF shifts much of that risk to the government. The contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee. This structure can incentivize less cost-consciousness from the contractor, as higher costs do not reduce their profit (the fee is fixed). Effective oversight, stringent cost accounting standards, and clear definitions of allowable costs are critical to mitigate this risk. Without robust management and monitoring, the total cost to the government could significantly exceed initial estimates, impacting budget predictability and value for money.

How does the competition level (4 bidders) for this contract compare to the average number of bidders for similar Department of the Navy engineering services contracts?

The fact that this contract received 4 bids under full and open competition suggests a moderate level of market interest. To assess if this is typical, one would need to analyze historical data for similar Department of the Navy engineering services contracts (NAICS 541330). If the average number of bids for comparable contracts is significantly higher (e.g., 8-10+), it might indicate that this particular requirement attracted less competition than usual, potentially due to its complexity, specialized nature, or the specific contract vehicle used. Conversely, if the average is 3-5 bids, then 4 bidders would be considered standard. A lower number of bidders can sometimes lead to less competitive pricing, although other factors like the quality of proposals and the specific evaluation criteria also play a crucial role in the final award.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002416R3068

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: CACI International Inc

Address: 14370 NEWBROOK DRIVE, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $185,895,364

Exercised Options: $185,727,070

Current Obligation: $178,841,732

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 9

Total Subaward Amount: $4,624,715

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4026

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline