DHS awarded $97.8M for technical support to National Istac, a contract with a high value and full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $97,795,452 ($97.8M)

Contractor: National Istac

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2004-09-22

End Date: 2006-07-31

Contract Duration: 677 days

Daily Burn Rate: $144.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: TECHNICAL SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: NEW ORLEANS, JEFFERSON County, LOUISIANA, 70121

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $97.8 million to NATIONAL ISTAC for work described as: TECHNICAL SUPPORT Key points: 1. The contract value of $97.8 million represents a significant investment in technical support services. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to better pricing. 3. The contract duration of 677 days indicates a medium-term engagement for the services provided. 4. The fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. The award to National Istac, with a reported value of $144,454, warrants further investigation into its track record and capacity for such a large award. 6. The contract's focus on technical support aligns with critical operational needs for the agency.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $97.8 million is substantial for technical support services. Without specific benchmarks for similar large-scale technical support contracts within FEMA or DHS, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging. The fixed-price nature of the contract is generally favorable for the government, as it caps costs. However, the reported contractor value of $144,454 seems disproportionately small compared to the contract award, raising questions about the contractor's scale or the accuracy of this data point. Further analysis would be needed to compare pricing against industry standards for comparable technical support.

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 a bid. This approach typically fosters a competitive environment, encouraging multiple bidders to offer their best pricing and technical solutions. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a healthy level of competition was sought.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by promoting competitive pricing and encouraging a wider pool of qualified contractors, which can lead to cost savings and better service quality.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), receiving essential technical support. The services delivered are critical for the operational effectiveness and efficiency of the agency's technical infrastructure. The geographic impact is likely national, supporting the agency's nationwide mission. The contract supports the technical workforce, potentially creating or sustaining jobs within the IT and technical support sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Discrepancy between the large contract value ($97.8M) and the reported contractor value ($144,454) requires clarification regarding the contractor's capacity and financial standing.
Lack of specific details on the technical support provided makes it difficult to assess performance metrics and potential risks.
The long contract duration could introduce risks related to technological obsolescence or changing agency needs if not managed proactively.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that should yield favorable terms.
The firm fixed-price contract type transfers cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The contract addresses a clear need for technical support within a critical federal agency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on technical support. The IT services market is vast and highly competitive, with significant government spending. Contracts of this magnitude are common for agencies like DHS that rely heavily on complex technological systems. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's value and scope to other large-scale IT support contracts awarded to federal agencies, considering factors like service level agreements and specialized expertise required.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, it likely did not involve specific subcontracting requirements aimed at small businesses unless stipulated within the contract's performance work statement. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests the competition was open to all qualified offerors, regardless of size, and that the primary contractor is likely a larger entity or a joint venture capable of handling the scope and value of this requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver services as specified to receive payment. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's performance or closeout.

Related Government Programs

IT Professional Services
Technical Support Services
Department of Homeland Security IT Contracts
Federal Emergency Management Agency Support Contracts
Large Value IT Contracts

Risk Flags

Contractor Capacity Concern: Potential mismatch between award value and reported contractor value.
Scope Definition Risk: Lack of detailed service description could lead to performance issues.
Technological Obsolescence Risk: Long contract duration may outpace technology evolution.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $97.8 million to NATIONAL ISTAC. TECHNICAL SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NATIONAL ISTAC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $97.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-09-22. End: 2006-07-31.

What is the specific nature of the technical support provided under this contract, and what are the key performance indicators (KPIs)?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'TECHNICAL SUPPORT' (d: 'TECHNICAL SUPPORT'). However, it lacks specific details regarding the exact nature of this support, such as help desk services, network maintenance, system administration, cybersecurity support, or specialized application assistance. Similarly, key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) that would be used to measure the contractor's performance are not detailed in the summary data. Understanding these specifics is crucial for assessing the contract's effectiveness and ensuring value for money. Without this information, it's difficult to determine if the services delivered align with FEMA's operational needs and if the contractor is meeting expected standards.

How does the contract value of $97.8 million compare to similar technical support contracts awarded by FEMA or DHS in recent years?

The contract value of $97.8 million for technical support is substantial. To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against other large-scale IT support contracts awarded by FEMA or DHS. For instance, similar contracts for enterprise-wide help desk services, network infrastructure management, or comprehensive IT system maintenance could serve as comparators. Without access to a detailed database of comparable contracts, it's challenging to definitively state whether $97.8 million represents a high, low, or average expenditure for this type of service. Factors such as the scope of services, duration, number of users supported, and specific technologies involved would need to be considered for a precise comparison.

What is the track record and capacity of National Istac to handle a contract of this magnitude ($97.8M)?

The provided data lists National Istac (co: 'NATIONAL ISTAC') as the contractor with an award value of $97,795,452.33. However, it also includes a 'br' field with a value of 144454, which could potentially represent a previous contract value or a different metric. If $144,454 represents a prior contract value or a measure of the company's size/capacity, it appears significantly smaller than the current $97.8 million award. This raises a potential concern regarding National Istac's capacity and experience in managing a contract of this scale. Further investigation into their past performance, financial stability, and demonstrated ability to execute large, complex technical support projects would be necessary to fully assess this risk.

What are the potential risks associated with the firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type for this technical support requirement?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type shifts the majority of performance risk to the contractor, National Istac. This means the contractor is obligated to complete the work within the agreed-upon price, regardless of unforeseen cost increases. For the government, this offers cost certainty. However, potential risks include the contractor cutting corners on quality or service levels to maintain profitability if costs escalate unexpectedly. Additionally, if the scope of work is not clearly defined or if significant changes are required, the FFP structure can lead to disputes or change order requests, potentially negating the initial cost certainty. Effective oversight is crucial to ensure the contractor meets all performance requirements despite the FFP structure.

Given the contract duration of 677 days (approximately 22 months), what are the implications for technological relevance and potential scope creep?

A contract duration of 677 days (roughly 1.85 years) for technical support necessitates careful management to ensure technological relevance. The IT landscape evolves rapidly, and technical support needs can change significantly over this period. There is a risk that the technologies supported or the methods of support may become outdated. To mitigate this, the contract should ideally include provisions for regular reviews, potential technology refreshes, and flexibility to adapt to evolving agency requirements. Scope creep is another potential risk; if not managed through a robust change control process, the contractor might be asked to perform work beyond the original scope without adequate price adjustments, or conversely, the agency might not receive the evolving support it needs if the scope remains rigidly defined.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Dewberry Companies LC, the (UEI: 621316814)

Address: 8401 ARLINGTON BLVD, FAIRFAX, VA, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $97,795,452

Exercised Options: $97,795,452

Current Obligation: $97,795,452

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSFEHQ04D0127

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline