Air Force awarded $16.2M for telecommunications services, with a 5-year duration and full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,223,935 ($16.2M)

Contractor: THE Centech Group Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-03-01

End Date: 2015-01-07

Contract Duration: 3,234 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: 200606!000235!5700!FA5215!15CONS/LGC !FA877104D0002 !A!N! !N!TN02 ! !20060301!20070228!191341627!191341627!191341627!N!THE CENTECH GROUP INC !4600 NORTH FAIRFAX DRIVE, !ARLINGTON !VA!22203!14050!003!15!HICKAM AFB !HONOLULU !HAWAII !+000001800000!N!N!000000000000!D399!OTHER ADP & TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541519!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !99990909!B!E!Y!N!Z!A!N!J!2!001!B! !Z!N!Z! ! !Y!A!N!N!D! ! ! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: HONOLULU, HONOLULU County, HAWAII, 96818, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $16.2 million to THE CENTECH GROUP INC. for work described as: 200606!000235!5700!FA5215!15CONS/LGC !FA877104D0002 !A!N! !N!TN02 ! !20060301!20070228!191341627!191341627!191341627!N!THE CENTECH GROUP INC !4600 NORTH FAIRFAX DRIVE, !ARLINGTON !VA!22203!14050!003!15!HICKAM AFB !HONO… Key points: 1. The contract was awarded for telecommunications services, indicating a need for robust communication infrastructure. 2. The duration of over 8 years suggests a long-term strategic requirement for these services. 3. Full and open competition was utilized, implying a potentially competitive bidding process. 4. The contract was awarded to THE CENTECH GROUP INC., a contractor with a significant award amount. 5. The services fall under 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services', a broad category. 6. The contract was awarded to a single vendor, despite being competed. 7. The contract was awarded in Hawaii, suggesting a specific geographic need. 8. The contract was awarded under a Firm Fixed Price type, providing cost certainty.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $16.2 million over approximately 8.5 years (from March 2006 to January 2015) averages to about $1.9 million per year. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services' would be necessary to fully assess value for money. Without specific per-unit cost data or comparisons to market rates for similar telecommunications services, it is difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent value. The duration and total award amount suggest a substantial requirement, but the absence of detailed performance metrics or cost breakdowns makes a precise value assessment challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. While the data specifies the competition type, it does not provide the number of bids received. A high level of competition typically leads to better pricing and innovation for the government. However, without knowing the number of bidders, it's difficult to ascertain the true extent of the competitive pressure on pricing for this specific contract.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible prices through a wide range of potential providers. This approach maximizes the opportunity for cost savings compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the U.S. Air Force personnel and operations at Hickam Air Force Base in Hawaii, who rely on these telecommunications services. The services delivered are categorized as 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services,' which could encompass a range of support, including network infrastructure, data transmission, and communication systems. The geographic impact is concentrated in Honolulu, Hawaii, specifically at Hickam AFB. Workforce implications could include the need for skilled telecommunications technicians and IT support staff, both within the contractor's organization and potentially within the Air Force to manage and utilize the services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the services provided over the contract's long duration.
The absence of specific cost breakdowns or unit pricing makes it challenging to benchmark the value for money effectively.
While competed, the number of bidders is not specified, leaving uncertainty about the degree of competitive pressure on pricing.
The broad categorization of 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services' may obscure the specific nature and criticality of the services rendered.

Positive Signals

The contract utilized 'full and open competition,' suggesting an effort to leverage market forces for better outcomes.
The award was made under a Firm Fixed Price contract type, which provides cost predictability for the government.
The contractor, THE CENTECH GROUP INC., was awarded a substantial contract, indicating a level of trust and capability.
The contract duration of over 8 years suggests a stable and ongoing requirement, potentially leading to efficiencies through long-term partnership.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Information Technology and Telecommunications sector, specifically under 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services.' This sector is characterized by rapid technological advancements and a constant demand for reliable communication infrastructure. The market size for government telecommunications services is substantial, with agencies continually investing in upgrading and maintaining their networks. This contract represents a significant investment by the Department of Defense, likely supporting critical operational needs at a major Air Force installation. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale telecommunications contracts awarded to various government entities for similar services.

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 small business set-aside. The primary focus of this contract appears to be on large-scale telecommunications services, likely procured from established providers in the industry.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer, contract specialists, and potentially program managers within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms and conditions of the Firm Fixed Price contract, including performance standards and delivery schedules. Transparency is often facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which provide basic award information. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Defense Information Technology Contracting Office (DITCO) contracts
Air Force Network Integration Center (AFNIC) procurements
General Services Administration (GSA) IT Schedule contracts
Telecommunications infrastructure support for military bases
Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) systems support

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of technological obsolescence.
Lack of detailed performance data hinders post-award evaluation.
Competition level details (number of bidders) are missing, impacting price discovery assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $16.2 million to THE CENTECH GROUP INC.. 200606!000235!5700!FA5215!15CONS/LGC !FA877104D0002 !A!N! !N!TN02 ! !20060301!20070228!191341627!191341627!191341627!N!THE CENTECH GROUP INC !4600 NORTH FAIRFAX DRIVE, !ARLINGTON !VA!22203!14050!003!15!HICKAM AFB !HONOLULU !HAWAII !+000001800000!N!N!000000000000!D399!OTHER ADP & TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541519!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE CENTECH GROUP INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $16.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-03-01. End: 2015-01-07.

What specific telecommunications services were provided under this contract, and how did they support the mission at Hickam AFB?

The contract, FA877104D0002, was awarded for 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services' to THE CENTECH GROUP INC. While the specific details of the services are not fully elaborated in the provided data, this category typically encompasses a broad range of support, including wired telecommunications, network infrastructure management, data transmission services, and potentially voice communication systems. For Hickam Air Force Base, these services would be critical for supporting daily operations, command and control functions, personnel communications, data transfer for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) activities, and general administrative functions. The long duration (over 8 years) suggests these services were integral to the base's ongoing operational readiness and mission execution, likely involving the maintenance, upgrade, or provision of the base's core communication backbone.

How does the $16.2 million award compare to other telecommunications contracts awarded by the Air Force or DoD during the 2006-2015 period?

The $16.2 million award over approximately 8.5 years represents an average annual expenditure of roughly $1.9 million for telecommunications services. During the 2006-2015 period, the Department of Defense, including the Air Force, made substantial investments in IT and telecommunications. Larger, enterprise-wide network modernization programs or global communication contracts could easily reach hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. However, for a specific base or a defined set of services, $1.9 million annually is a significant but not exceptionally large sum. It suggests a substantial requirement for a particular facility or function, likely falling within the mid-range for base-level telecommunications support contracts of that era. Detailed comparisons would require analyzing contract databases for similar scope, duration, and service types awarded to other entities during the same timeframe.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this contract, and how was performance measured?

The provided data does not include specific details regarding Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for this contract. Typically, telecommunications service contracts would include metrics related to network uptime, latency, bandwidth availability, response times for outages, and potentially customer satisfaction. Performance measurement would likely involve regular reporting by the contractor, audits by government representatives, and potentially user feedback mechanisms. Given the Firm Fixed Price nature, the focus would be on ensuring the contracted services were delivered reliably and met the specified technical requirements. Without access to the contract's statement of work or performance clauses, a definitive assessment of how performance was measured is not possible.

What is the track record of THE CENTECH GROUP INC. in performing similar government contracts, particularly within the telecommunications sector?

THE CENTECH GROUP INC. was awarded this $16.2 million contract for telecommunications services. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their broader contract history with the federal government. This would involve looking at other awards, their values, the agencies they served, and the types of services rendered. Information on past performance, including any awards or penalties, contract terminations, or customer satisfaction ratings, would be crucial. A review of their portfolio within the telecommunications and IT services sector would indicate their experience level and reliability in delivering similar solutions. Without this broader context, it's difficult to definitively characterize their overall track record based solely on this single award.

Were there any significant risks identified or mitigation strategies employed for this contract, given its duration and scope?

The provided data does not explicitly list identified risks or mitigation strategies for this contract. However, for a long-term telecommunications contract of this magnitude, potential risks could include technological obsolescence, changes in security requirements, contractor performance issues, or budget fluctuations. Mitigation strategies might have involved phased technology refreshes, robust security protocols, clear performance management frameworks, and contingency planning. The Firm Fixed Price nature of the contract shifts some of the financial risk to the contractor, incentivizing them to manage costs effectively. The 'full and open competition' aspect also suggests an effort to mitigate risks associated with sole-sourcing by ensuring a competitive environment.

How has federal spending on 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services' evolved since this contract was awarded, and what trends does this contract exemplify?

Since the award of this contract (2006-2015), federal spending on 'Other ADP & Telecommunication Services' has continued to be a significant area of investment, driven by modernization efforts, cybersecurity needs, and the increasing reliance on digital infrastructure. This contract exemplifies the government's ongoing need for robust and reliable communication networks to support military operations and administrative functions. Trends since then have included a greater emphasis on cloud computing, software-defined networking, enhanced cybersecurity measures, and the integration of advanced communication technologies. While this contract represents a more traditional approach to telecommunications infrastructure, it highlights the foundational importance of these services, which remain critical even as technologies evolve.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite) › Wired Telecommunications Carriers

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

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

Address: 4600 FAIRFAX DR STE 400, ARLINGTON, VA, 22203

Business Categories: Category Business, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,679,223

Exercised Options: $7,776,114

Current Obligation: $16,223,935

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA877104D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline