DHS awards $185M IT contract to Unisys for support services, lacking competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $185,360,630 ($185.4M)

Contractor: Unisys Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2006-01-01

End Date: 2011-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,098 days

Daily Burn Rate: $88.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IT BRIDGE

Place of Performance

Location: RESTON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20190

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $185.4 million to UNISYS CORPORATION for work described as: IT BRIDGE Key points: 1. Significant contract value of $185.4M over 5 years. 2. Sole-source award to Unisys Corporation raises competition concerns. 3. Potential for overpayment due to lack of competitive bidding. 4. IT support services sector is broad, making direct benchmarks difficult.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's $185.4M value over nearly 5.5 years suggests a high per-year spend. Without competitive pricing, it's difficult to assess if this represents fair value compared to similar IT support services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source award to Unisys Corporation. This lack of competition limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition likely results in a higher price than a competed contract, impacting taxpayer funds negatively.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the lack of competitive bidding. The long duration of the contract limits opportunities for other vendors to compete. Dependence on a single vendor for critical IT support services can pose a risk.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition
Long contract duration
Potential for vendor lock-in

Positive Signals

Established vendor relationship
Consistent service delivery over contract period

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under 'All Other Support Services' within the IT sector. Spending in this broad category can vary widely, but large, long-term sole-source awards warrant scrutiny for efficiency.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not competed and awarded to a large corporation (Unisys), indicating no direct benefit or opportunity for small businesses in this specific award.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this award suggests limited oversight on price competitiveness. Further review would be needed to confirm if performance metrics and cost controls were adequately monitored.

Related Government Programs

All Other Support Services
Department of Homeland Security Contracting
Transportation Security Administration Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Long contract duration may indicate lack of market research.
Potential for inflated costs due to no competition.
Limited transparency on pricing justification.
Risk of vendor lock-in for critical IT services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $185.4 million to UNISYS CORPORATION. IT BRIDGE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNISYS CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $185.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-01-01. End: 2011-09-30.

What was the justification for the sole-source award, and were alternatives explored?

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED'. A full justification would typically involve documenting why competition was not feasible or advantageous, such as unique capabilities of the vendor or urgent needs. Without this documentation, it's impossible to assess if alternatives were adequately explored or if the sole-source decision was fully warranted.

How was the 'fair and reasonable' price determined without competition?

Determining a 'fair and reasonable' price for a sole-source contract requires robust justification, often relying on historical pricing, commercial item pricing, or independent government cost estimates. The data does not provide details on the pricing methodology used. Without this, it's difficult to validate the price against market rates or ensure taxpayer value.

What mechanisms were in place to ensure effective service delivery and cost control over the contract's duration?

While the contract type is 'FIRM FIXED PRICE', which shifts some cost risk to the contractor, effective oversight is still crucial. Details on performance metrics, service level agreements, and any cost-plus or incentive features are absent. Ensuring value requires monitoring performance and managing the relationship to prevent scope creep or inefficiencies.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Other Support Services › All Other Support Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 11720 PLAZA AMERICA DR, RESTON, VA, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $201,219,330

Exercised Options: $201,219,330

Current Obligation: $185,360,630

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSTS0306DCIO500

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline