Department of Defense awards $111M contract for DCGS-A fielding and training, with 6 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $111,262,088 ($111.3M)

Contractor: Sev1tech, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-01-28

End Date: 2025-07-17

Contract Duration: 2,362 days

Daily Burn Rate: $47.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: DCGS-A FIELD OFFICE FORT HOOD CONTRACT W15P7T-17-D-0147 TASK ORDER W56KGY-19-F-0022 THAT SUPPORTS FIELDING AND TRAINING TO PM-DCGS-A FIELD OFFICE FORT HOOD, PEO-IEW&S. 1 BASE YEAR WITH 4 OPTION YEARS.

Place of Performance

Location: WOODBRIDGE, PRINCE WILLIAM County, VIRGINIA, 22192

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $111.3 million to SEV1TECH, LLC for work described as: DCGS-A FIELD OFFICE FORT HOOD CONTRACT W15P7T-17-D-0147 TASK ORDER W56KGY-19-F-0022 THAT SUPPORTS FIELDING AND TRAINING TO PM-DCGS-A FIELD OFFICE FORT HOOD, PEO-IEW&S. 1 BASE YEAR WITH 4 OPTION YEARS. Key points: 1. Contract aims to support fielding and training for the DCGS-A system. 2. Performance period spans over 6 years, indicating a long-term need. 3. Competition involved 6 bidders, suggesting a moderately competitive environment. 4. Contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541712 points to R&D in physical and engineering sciences. 6. The contract is a task order under a larger IDIQ, suggesting it's part of a broader acquisition strategy.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of approximately $111 million over its potential duration needs to be benchmarked against similar support contracts for complex intelligence systems. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure requires careful oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and that the fixed fee adequately compensates the contractor for performance without incentivizing excessive spending. Without specific cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for similar services, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with six bidders participating. This level of competition is generally positive, as it allows for a broader range of potential offerors and can drive more competitive pricing. The presence of multiple bidders suggests that the market has the capacity to support this requirement and that the government had a reasonable selection pool.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition with multiple bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at a more competitive price, potentially leading to cost savings compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel who will receive training and support for the Distributed Common Ground System-Army (DCGS-A). Services delivered include fielding, training, and potentially sustainment support for a critical intelligence analysis system. The geographic impact is centered around Fort Hood, Texas, a major Army installation, but the system's use is widespread across Army operations. Workforce implications include the need for skilled personnel to provide training and technical support, potentially creating jobs for subject matter experts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize overspending if not rigorously managed.
Long-term contracts require ongoing performance monitoring to ensure continued value.
Reliance on a single system (DCGS-A) means any performance issues can have significant operational impact.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a healthy market and potential for competitive pricing.
Multiple bidders indicate a robust supplier base for this type of service.
The contract supports a critical intelligence system, indicating strategic importance.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically NAICS code 541712, which covers R&D in physical, engineering, and life sciences. This area is crucial for defense modernization, involving the development and implementation of advanced intelligence analysis platforms like DCGS-A. The market for such specialized systems and associated support services is typically dominated by a few large defense contractors and specialized technology firms. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's value and structure to other support and development contracts for similar intelligence systems within the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, small businesses are unlikely to be direct prime contractors. However, the prime contractor, SEV1TECH, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill specific aspects of the contract, contributing to the small business ecosystem. Further analysis of subcontracting plans would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's program management offices responsible for DCGS-A and PEO-IEW&S. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) nature necessitates robust financial oversight to scrutinize costs and ensure the fixed fee is justified. Transparency would be enhanced through regular reporting requirements and potential audits by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and the Department of Defense Inspector General (DoDIG) if performance or cost issues arise.

Related Government Programs

DCGS-A Program
PEO-IEW&S Contracts
Intelligence Systems Support
Army Training Contracts
Fielding and Sustainment Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost growth.
Long-term contract duration requires sustained oversight.
Performance on complex intelligence systems requires specialized expertise.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $111.3 million to SEV1TECH, LLC. DCGS-A FIELD OFFICE FORT HOOD CONTRACT W15P7T-17-D-0147 TASK ORDER W56KGY-19-F-0022 THAT SUPPORTS FIELDING AND TRAINING TO PM-DCGS-A FIELD OFFICE FORT HOOD, PEO-IEW&S. 1 BASE YEAR WITH 4 OPTION YEARS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SEV1TECH, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $111.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-01-28. End: 2025-07-17.

What is the historical spending pattern for DCGS-A fielding and training support contracts?

Analyzing historical spending for DCGS-A fielding and training requires examining past task orders and contracts awarded under the relevant indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicles or similar contract vehicles. This specific task order, W56KGY-19-F0022, is valued at approximately $111 million and has a performance period extending to July 2025. To understand historical patterns, one would look at the total obligated amounts and spending trends for previous years related to DCGS-A support, including any prior fielding efforts or training initiatives. This would involve querying contract databases for similar contract line item numbers (CLINs) or service descriptions. A trend analysis could reveal if spending has been consistent, increasing, or decreasing, and whether this current award represents a typical or anomalous level of investment for such services.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types for similar R&D and support services?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common for research and development efforts where the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, or when the government wants to incentivize contractor innovation. In such contracts, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee representing profit. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility for the government if requirements evolve but carries a higher risk of cost growth, as the contractor is incentivized to incur costs to achieve the fixed fee. Other contract types like Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) introduce performance incentives tied to cost, schedule, or technical targets, potentially offering better value than pure CPFF. For well-defined R&D or support services, FFP contracts are generally preferred by the government for cost predictability, but they require a very clear statement of work.

What is SEV1TECH, LLC's track record with Department of Defense contracts, particularly in intelligence systems?

SEV1TECH, LLC's track record with Department of Defense contracts, especially concerning intelligence systems like DCGS-A, is a critical factor in assessing contract performance risk. A review of federal procurement data would reveal the company's history of awards, contract types, past performance ratings, and any instances of contract disputes or terminations. For intelligence systems, experience with complex software, data analysis platforms, and secure network environments is paramount. Understanding SEV1TECH's prior success in delivering similar services, meeting technical requirements, and managing costs on comparable contracts would provide insight into their capability to execute this task order effectively. Information on their past performance on DCGS-A or related programs would be particularly relevant.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of DCGS-A fielding and training?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for measuring the success of DCGS-A fielding and training would likely focus on operational readiness, user proficiency, and system effectiveness. For fielding, KPIs might include the percentage of systems successfully deployed on schedule, the number of operational issues encountered post-deployment, and user satisfaction with the installed systems. For training, KPIs could encompass trainee proficiency scores, the percentage of personnel completing training requirements, feedback on training quality and relevance, and the observed improvement in analysts' ability to utilize DCGS-A capabilities for intelligence tasks. System performance metrics, such as uptime, data processing speed, and accuracy of analysis tools, would also be crucial. The contract's statement of work would detail the specific KPIs and acceptable performance levels.

How does the $111 million value compare to the overall budget for DCGS-A program sustainment and modernization?

The $111 million value of this task order represents a significant investment in the fielding and training aspects of the DCGS-A program. To contextualize this figure, it needs to be compared against the total allocated budget for the DCGS-A program, encompassing its entire lifecycle, including research, development, procurement, sustainment, and modernization. The DCGS-A program is a complex and costly endeavor for the Army, involving substantial resources over many years. This specific award likely represents a portion of the annual sustainment and modernization budget dedicated to ensuring the system remains operational and effective. Understanding the proportion this task order represents relative to the overall program budget provides insight into its strategic importance and the government's commitment to maintaining and enhancing this intelligence capability.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12700 BLACK FOREST LN STE 306, WOODBRIDGE, VA, 22192

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $218,717,322

Exercised Options: $116,661,252

Current Obligation: $111,262,088

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 5

Total Subaward Amount: $36,056,481

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W15P7T17D0147

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline