Awarding agency: General Services Administration · Funded by Department of Defense
Who got paid, how much, for what, and whether it is defensible. Citizen opinion on the record, not a mandate.
Status and record
TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATION FROM REGION 1 TO FEDSIM
$455.7M · DELIVERY ORDER · General Services Administration · DC
FEDERAL SPENDING · CITIZEN OPINION
Was this federal payment to SALIENT CRGT, INC. worth it?
$455.7M · General Services Administration to SALIENT CRGT, INC.
Be the first to put your opinion on the record.
What this award is
AI analysis
This contract transferred management of an existing government services deal from one part of the General Services Administration (GSA) to FedSim, which is GSA's Federal Systems Integration and Management Center, a unit that handles complex technology and support contracts. The recipient, Salient CRGT, Inc., is a technology and professional services company being paid to provide services to the Department of Defense (DoD).
DEEPER CONTEXTAnalysis · Risks · Arguments
WHY THIS MONEY IS BEING SPENT
WHY WAS THIS FUNDED?
The DoD needed ongoing technology or professional support services, and the contract was managed under GSA's authority to provide shared services and contracting support to other federal agencies. The administrative transfer from Region 1 to FedSim suggests a reorganization of who oversees the contract, not a new scope of work.
WHAT PUBLIC PROBLEM IS IT TRYING TO SOLVE?
The DoD relies on outside contractors to help manage information technology systems, cybersecurity, and other professional support functions that keep military and defense operations running. This contract appears intended to ensure those support services continue without interruption.
WHO BENEFITS?
DoD staff and operations benefit from continued technology and professional support services. Employees of Salient CRGT, Inc. also benefit through employment funded by this contract over its roughly four-year period.
Plain-language reading generated from the USASpending award record. Not legal or financial advice.
RISKS AND TRADEOFFS
WHAT ARE THE RISKS?
Because the contract type is listed as unknown and the title only describes an administrative transfer, it is difficult to fully assess what services are being delivered or how performance is being measured. Large, multi-year contracts with limited public detail carry risks of reduced oversight and accountability.
WHAT HAPPENS IF FUNDING IS REMOVED?
If this contract were cancelled, the DoD could face gaps in whatever technology or professional support services Salient CRGT, Inc. was providing, potentially disrupting ongoing operations. A replacement contractor or in-house team would need to be found quickly to avoid service interruptions.
FOR AND AGAINST
ARGUMENTS FOR
- •Using GSA's centralized contracting system (FedSim) can lower costs and reduce duplication across federal agencies, making the spending more efficient.
- •Maintaining continuity of IT and professional support services helps the DoD avoid disruptions to critical defense operations.
- •Centralizing contract administration under FedSim may improve oversight and standardize how the contract is managed.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST
- •The contract type is listed as unknown and the title only describes an internal administrative action, making it very hard for the public to understand what $455.7 million is actually purchasing.
- •Large, long-term contracts awarded to a single company over four years can limit competition and may not reflect the best value for taxpayers.
- •Without clear performance metrics or program details in the public record, it is difficult to hold either the contractor or the government accountable for results.
SPENDING TIMELINE
Add a tag
Written opinion on whether this spending is appropriate · not a duplicate of the Worth It / Wasteful vote or spending record. Similar opinions on this spending record can open a solution poll.
3 similar opinions open a solution poll
Loading opinions
Your stance is citizen opinion; it does not form a citizen mandate. Mandate accountability applies when Congress votes on tracked legislation.