Transportation contract for engineering services awarded to Advanced Management Technology, Inc. for over $7.45 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $7,450,701 ($7.5M)

Contractor: Advanced Management Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2017-08-24

End Date: 2026-05-21

Contract Duration: 3,192 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: THE PURPOSE OF THIS FIRM FIXED PRICE TASK ORDER IS TO COVER CONTRACTOR FACILITY COSTS IN ACCORDANCE CONTRACT DTFAWA-17-D-00013 AND ATTACHED STATEMENT OF WORK DATED AUGUST 23, 2017. IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20591

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $7.5 million to ADVANCED MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: THE PURPOSE OF THIS FIRM FIXED PRICE TASK ORDER IS TO COVER CONTRACTOR FACILITY COSTS IN ACCORDANCE CONTRACT DTFAWA-17-D-00013 AND ATTACHED STATEMENT OF WORK DATED AUGUST 23, 2017. IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract focuses on facility costs, indicating a need for specialized infrastructure support. 2. The duration of the contract spans nearly 9 years, suggesting a long-term requirement. 3. Awarded under a firm-fixed-price structure, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The contract is a delivery order against a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract. 5. Engineering services are critical for maintaining and improving transportation infrastructure. 6. The contract is not set aside for small businesses, implying larger prime contractors are expected.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $7.45 million over approximately 9 years averages to roughly $830,000 annually. Without specific details on the services provided or comparable contracts for facility costs, it's difficult to definitively benchmark value. However, the firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the scope is well-defined. The lack of detailed performance metrics 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 offers. This method generally promotes a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and service offerings. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a robust competition was sought.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best value by allowing a wide range of potential contractors to bid, driving down prices through market forces.

Public Impact

The Department of Transportation, specifically the Federal Aviation Administration, benefits from this contract by securing necessary facility cost coverage for engineering services. The services provided are essential for the operational integrity and potential upgrades of transportation infrastructure. The contract's impact is primarily within the District of Columbia, where the contractor's facilities are located. The contract supports the engineering services sector, potentially involving skilled labor and specialized expertise.

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 rendered.
The contract's long duration could lead to scope creep or evolving requirements that may not be optimally addressed under the initial fixed-price structure.
Limited information on the specific nature of 'facility costs' makes it hard to determine if the pricing is competitive for the services provided.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially leading to cost savings for the government if managed effectively.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process that should yield favorable terms.
The contract is a delivery order against an existing IDIQ, implying a pre-vetted contractor and established framework.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS code 541330), which is a significant part of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. The federal government is a major consumer of engineering services, particularly for infrastructure projects managed by agencies like the Department of Transportation. Spending in this sector is often driven by the need for design, planning, and oversight of complex projects. Benchmarking this specific contract's value is challenging without more detail on the scope of 'facility costs' and the specific engineering tasks involved.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, as indicated by 'ss: false' and 'sb: false'. This suggests that the competition was open to all business sizes, and the prime contractor is likely a larger entity. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans or requirements for small business participation. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) within the Department of Transportation. As a delivery order against a larger IDIQ contract, there are likely established reporting requirements and performance monitoring mechanisms in place. The firm-fixed-price nature implies that the government's primary oversight concern would be ensuring the contractor meets the defined scope of work and facility cost requirements. Transparency is dependent on the public availability of contract performance reports and any associated Inspector General audits, which are not detailed here.

Related Government Programs

Federal Aviation Administration Operations
Department of Transportation Infrastructure Projects
Engineering and Architectural Services Contracts
Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of detailed scope of work
Unclear performance metrics
Limited public information on facility cost breakdown

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $7.5 million to ADVANCED MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC.. THE PURPOSE OF THIS FIRM FIXED PRICE TASK ORDER IS TO COVER CONTRACTOR FACILITY COSTS IN ACCORDANCE CONTRACT DTFAWA-17-D-00013 AND ATTACHED STATEMENT OF WORK DATED AUGUST 23, 2017. IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ADVANCED MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $7.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-08-24. End: 2026-05-21.

What specific engineering services are covered under this contract, and what is the breakdown of 'facility costs'?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'contractor facility costs' related to a specific statement of work under a larger IDIQ contract (DTFAWA-17-D-00013). However, the exact nature of these facility costs and the specific engineering services they support are not detailed. Typically, facility costs in such contracts could encompass expenses related to the contractor's physical plant, utilities, maintenance, and potentially overhead associated with maintaining operational readiness for engineering tasks. Without the attached Statement of Work (SOW) or further details, it's impossible to provide a precise breakdown or list of services. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to assess the value proposition or compare it accurately to market rates for similar support.

How does the $7.45 million contract value compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the FAA or DOT?

Benchmarking the $7.45 million value requires understanding the scope and duration. This contract spans from August 2017 to May 2026 (approximately 9 years), making the average annual value around $830,000. The Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Transportation award numerous contracts for engineering services, ranging from small, specialized studies to large-scale infrastructure design and oversight. Contracts for facility costs specifically are less common as a standalone line item and are usually embedded within broader service agreements. Without knowing the exact services and deliverables tied to these facility costs, a direct comparison is difficult. However, for long-term, specialized engineering support contracts of this duration, the annual average appears within a plausible range, though a detailed analysis would necessitate comparing it against contracts with similar SOWs and facility cost components.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the contractor's performance under this delivery order?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Advanced Management Technology, Inc.'s performance for this delivery order. Typically, for firm-fixed-price contracts, performance is assessed against the adherence to the Statement of Work (SOW), delivery schedules, and quality standards. For contracts involving facility costs, KPIs might relate to the availability and readiness of facilities, cost control within agreed parameters, and compliance with safety and operational regulations. The absence of explicit KPIs in the summary data makes it challenging to independently assess the contractor's performance and the overall effectiveness of the contract. Further review of the SOW and contract award documentation would be necessary to identify these metrics.

What is the track record of Advanced Management Technology, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Transportation?

Advanced Management Technology, Inc. (AMT) has a history of receiving federal contracts. While the provided data pertains to a specific delivery order, a broader search of federal procurement databases would reveal AMT's portfolio. Companies like AMT often specialize in providing professional services, including management, engineering, and technical support, to various government agencies. Their track record with the Department of Transportation (DOT) and its sub-agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would likely include contracts similar in nature to this one, focusing on support services. Assessing their past performance, including on-time delivery, quality of work, and adherence to budget on previous contracts, is crucial for understanding their reliability and capability in fulfilling current obligations.

How has federal spending on engineering services, particularly within the transportation sector, trended over the past decade?

Federal spending on engineering services within the transportation sector has generally seen fluctuations driven by infrastructure investment cycles, economic conditions, and administration priorities. Historically, agencies like the Department of Transportation (DOT), including the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), are significant sources of funding for engineering services. This spending supports a wide range of activities, from planning and design of new infrastructure (roads, bridges, airports) to maintenance, modernization, and safety-related studies. Periods of increased federal investment in infrastructure, such as those following major economic stimulus packages or dedicated infrastructure bills, typically lead to a rise in demand and spending on engineering services. Conversely, budget constraints or shifts in priorities can lead to reductions. Analyzing trends requires looking at aggregate spending data across relevant agencies and NAICS codes (like 541330 for Engineering Services).

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: MODIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT › MODIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Tetra Tech, Inc.

Address: 1515 WILSON BLVD STE 1100, ARLINGTON, VA, 22209

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $7,450,701

Exercised Options: $7,450,701

Current Obligation: $7,450,701

Actual Outlays: $4,294,785

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAWA17D00013

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline