DHS's $61.8M Microsoft ELA payment to Dell Marketing L.P. for electronic computer manufacturing services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $61,812,342 ($61.8M)

Contractor: Dell Marketing L.P.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2012-06-29

End Date: 2015-06-26

Contract Duration: 1,092 days

Daily Burn Rate: $56.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: MICROSOFT ELA: (ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT)

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20528

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $61.8 million to DELL MARKETING L.P. for work described as: MICROSOFT ELA: (ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT) Key points: 1. Value for money assessed against comparable enterprise software agreements. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open process, potentially driving competitive pricing. 3. Risk indicators include contract duration and reliance on a single vendor for enterprise licensing. 4. Performance context is tied to the ongoing provision of Microsoft software to DHS. 5. Sector positioning within IT services, specifically enterprise software licensing and support.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The $61.8 million payment represents the fourth year of an Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) for Microsoft products. Benchmarking this specific payment is challenging without knowing the exact scope of software and services included. However, enterprise software licensing costs can vary significantly based on user counts, product suites, and negotiated discounts. Compared to ad-hoc software purchases, ELAs often offer cost savings through volume licensing, but the overall value depends on actual utilization and the competitiveness of the initial bid.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The presence of a single awardee, Dell Marketing L.P., indicates they offered the most advantageous proposal based on the evaluation criteria. A full and open competition is generally expected to yield competitive pricing and terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition provides taxpayers with assurance that the government sought the best possible pricing and terms, maximizing the value of federal dollars spent on essential software.

Public Impact

Federal employees across the Department of Homeland Security benefit from access to necessary Microsoft software for their daily operations. The services delivered include the licensing and potential support for a wide range of Microsoft software products. The geographic impact is nationwide, supporting DHS operations across all its components and locations. Workforce implications involve ensuring federal employees have the tools required for their mission-critical tasks.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology sector, specifically focusing on enterprise software licensing. The market for enterprise software, particularly for operating systems and productivity suites like Microsoft's, is dominated by a few major players. Government agencies, like DHS, often utilize ELAs to manage costs and ensure compliance for large user bases. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large federal ELAs for similar software suites across different agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. As an Enterprise License Agreement, the primary awardee is a large corporation. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses would depend on Dell's internal policies and the specific terms of the agreement, which are not detailed here. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely indirect, through Dell's broader supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program officials within DHS. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including delivery schedules and software functionality. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

it, dhs, enterprise-license-agreement, microsoft, dell-marketing-l-p, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, software-licensing, federal-contract, district-of-columbia, bpa-call

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $61.8 million to DELL MARKETING L.P.. MICROSOFT ELA: (ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DELL MARKETING L.P..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Office of Procurement Operations).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $61.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-06-29. End: 2015-06-26.

What specific Microsoft products and services are covered under this $61.8 million payment, and how does this align with DHS's current IT needs?

The provided data identifies this as a 'MICROSOFT ELA: (ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT)' for electronic computer manufacturing services, awarded to DELL MARKETING L.P. by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). While the specific products and services are not itemized in the abbreviated data, an Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) typically covers a broad suite of Microsoft software, potentially including operating systems (Windows), productivity software (Office 365/Microsoft 365), server licenses, and development tools. The $61.8 million payment represents the fourth year of this agreement. To assess alignment with DHS's IT needs, one would need to examine DHS's IT strategic plan, software utilization reports, and compare the licensed products against actual deployed software to determine if the ELA is adequately meeting requirements or if there is over- or under-licensing. Without this detailed information, the alignment remains an assumption based on the nature of ELAs.

How does the $61.8 million annual cost compare to previous years of this ELA and to similar ELAs at other federal agencies?

The data indicates this is the 'ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT,' suggesting a multi-year agreement. To compare this $61.8 million cost to previous years, historical payment data for this specific ELA would be required. It's possible the cost has remained stable, increased due to additional licenses or services, or decreased due to renegotiated terms or reduced scope. Comparing this to similar ELAs at other federal agencies is also challenging without specific details on the scope of software, user counts, and negotiated discounts. However, agencies often negotiate ELAs to achieve volume discounts. A preliminary assessment would involve researching publicly available contract data for other large federal ELAs for Microsoft products to identify a general cost range per user or per agency size. Significant deviations from such benchmarks could warrant further investigation into the specific terms and conditions of this DHS contract.

What is the total value and duration of the original Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) that this payment is part of?

The provided data specifies the award date as '2012-06-29' and the effective end date as '2015-06-26,' with a duration of '1092' days. This suggests the original contract period was approximately three years. However, the data also labels this payment as 'ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT,' which creates a discrepancy. It's possible the original contract was extended, modified, or that the 'ELA YEAR 4 PAYMENT' refers to a subsequent agreement or a renewal that began after the initial 2015 end date. To determine the total value and duration, one would need to examine the original contract award documents, any modifications, and subsequent renewals or new awards related to this Microsoft ELA for DHS. The current data point alone does not provide a clear picture of the ELA's full lifecycle.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success and effectiveness of this Microsoft ELA for DHS?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this Microsoft ELA. Typically, for software licensing agreements, KPIs might include metrics such as software uptime and availability (especially for cloud-based services like Microsoft 365), user adoption rates, help desk ticket resolution times related to the software, and compliance with licensing terms. Effectiveness could also be measured by the extent to which the software enables DHS personnel to perform their duties efficiently and securely. To identify the specific KPIs, one would need to review the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Objectives (SOO), which would detail the expected outcomes and how performance will be evaluated. Without access to these documents, assessing the ELA's effectiveness is speculative.

What is Dell Marketing L.P.'s track record with large federal IT contracts, particularly in software licensing and enterprise agreements?

Dell Marketing L.P. is a significant federal contractor with a substantial history of providing IT hardware, software, and services to various government agencies. Their track record with large federal IT contracts, including software licensing and enterprise agreements, is generally extensive. They often act as a reseller and integrator for major software vendors like Microsoft, Cisco, and others. Federal procurement databases (like FPDS) would show numerous awards to Dell for IT equipment, maintenance, and software licenses. For enterprise agreements specifically, Dell's success would be measured by their ability to secure competitive pricing, provide timely delivery, offer effective technical support (or facilitate it from the software vendor), and manage the contract lifecycle efficiently. Reviewing Dell's past performance evaluations and contract history within federal systems would provide a more detailed assessment of their capabilities in this specific area.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingComputer and Peripheral Equipment ManufacturingElectronic Computer Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT (INCLD FIRMWARE) SOFTWARE,SUPPLIES& SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Dell Technologies Inc. (UEI: 601839660)

Address: ONE DELL WAY, ROUND ROCK, TX, 78682

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $61,812,342

Exercised Options: $61,812,342

Current Obligation: $61,812,342

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSHQDC09A00032

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline

Start Date: 2012-06-29

Current End Date: 2015-06-26

Potential End Date: 2015-06-26 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2017-07-30

More Contracts from Dell Marketing L.P.

View all Dell Marketing L.P. federal contracts →

Other Department of Homeland Security Contracts

View all Department of Homeland Security contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending