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
SITEC 3 EOM PROVIDES USSOCOM WITH O&M SERVICES TO MAINTAIN NETOPS, MAINTAIN SYSTEMS & NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE, PROVIDE END USER & COMMON DEVICE SUPPORT, PROVIDE CONFIGURATION, CHANGE, LICENSE, & ASSET MGMT. CONDUCT TRAINING AND PERFORM IMACS SERVICES.
$798.3M · DELIVERY ORDER · General Services Administration · FL
FEDERAL SPENDING · CITIZEN OPINION
Was this federal payment to PERATON INC. worth it?
$798.3M · General Services Administration to PERATON INC.
Be the first to put your opinion on the record.
What this award is
AI analysis
This is a contract where the U.S. government is paying Peraton Inc. about $798 million to keep the computer networks and IT systems running for USSOCOM (U.S. Special Operations Command), the military branch that oversees special forces like Navy SEALs and Army Rangers. Peraton will handle everything from maintaining servers and networks to helping individual users with their devices and providing training.
DEEPER CONTEXTAnalysis · Risks · Arguments
WHY THIS MONEY IS BEING SPENT
WHY WAS THIS FUNDED?
USSOCOM (U.S. Special Operations Command) is required by law to maintain secure, functioning IT systems to support its military missions. This contract falls under the SITEC 3 (Sustainable IT Enterprise Contract 3) program, which is a GSA (General Services Administration) vehicle designed to provide large-scale IT operations and maintenance services to the Department of Defense.
WHAT PUBLIC PROBLEM IS IT TRYING TO SOLVE?
The U.S. military's special operations forces rely on complex computer networks and IT systems to plan and carry out missions, and those systems must be kept secure, up to date, and running at all times. Without reliable IT support, the command's ability to coordinate personnel, share intelligence, and respond to threats could be compromised.
WHO BENEFITS?
U.S. Special Operations Command personnel, including special forces troops and support staff, benefit from reliable IT systems that help them do their jobs safely and effectively. The contract also directly employs workers at Peraton Inc. and its subcontractors, many likely located in Florida where the company is based.
Plain-language reading generated from the USASpending award record. Not legal or financial advice.
RISKS AND TRADEOFFS
WHAT ARE THE RISKS?
Large, multi-year IT contracts like this one can be difficult to oversee, and there is a risk that costs could grow beyond the original estimate or that performance may fall short without strong government monitoring. The long contract period (over three years) also means the government has limited flexibility to switch providers if problems arise.
WHAT HAPPENS IF FUNDING IS REMOVED?
If this contract were cancelled, USSOCOM could lose the dedicated IT staff and services needed to keep its networks and systems operational, potentially disrupting communications and data systems used by special operations forces. The command would need to find an alternative provider quickly or risk serious gaps in its IT support.
FOR AND AGAINST
ARGUMENTS FOR
- •Keeping special operations forces connected and equipped with functioning IT systems directly supports national security missions that protect American lives.
- •Centralizing IT operations and maintenance under one contractor can reduce duplication, streamline support, and potentially lower overall costs compared to managing many separate contracts.
- •The SITEC 3 program was designed to improve IT efficiency across the Department of Defense, meaning this contract follows an established, structured approach to managing large IT needs.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST
- •At nearly $800 million, this is a very large contract awarded to a single company, which raises concerns about competition and whether taxpayers are getting the best possible price.
- •Long-term contracts with one vendor can create dependency, making it harder for the government to switch providers or push back if service quality declines.
- •The contract type is listed as unknown, which limits public transparency about how costs are structured and whether the government bears extra financial risk if expenses increase.
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.