Navy awards $31.5M for combat environment simulation range sustainment and upgrades to Jacobs Technology Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,498,778 ($31.5M)

Contractor: Jacobs Technology Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-03-27

End Date: 2013-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,379 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: COMBAT ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION RANGE SUSTAINMENT AND UPGRADES

Place of Performance

Location: RIDGECREST, KERN County, CALIFORNIA, 93555, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.5 million to JACOBS TECHNOLOGY INC for work described as: COMBAT ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION RANGE SUSTAINMENT AND UPGRADES Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF), which incentivizes contractor performance but can lead to higher costs if not managed closely. 3. The duration of the contract is substantial at 2379 days, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract was awarded to a single bidder, which warrants further investigation into the competition dynamics. 5. The services provided are engineering-related, supporting critical defense infrastructure. 6. The contract was awarded in California, a state with a significant defense industry presence.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for flexibility but also introduces potential for cost overruns if award fees are consistently maximized without proportional performance gains. The total award amount of $31.5 million over approximately 6.5 years suggests a moderate annual spend for sustainment and upgrade services of this nature. Further analysis would require understanding the scope of 'sustainment and upgrades' and comparing the per-unit costs of specific services against industry standards or other government contracts for similar simulation range support.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. However, the data shows only one bid was received. This situation can arise for various reasons, including a highly specialized requirement, limited market capacity, or a lack of interest from potential competitors. While the initial competition was open, the outcome of a single bid raises questions about the actual level of competition achieved and its potential impact on pricing and innovation.

Taxpayer Impact: A single bid in a full and open competition may mean that taxpayers did not benefit from the full potential of competitive pricing. While the government sought multiple bids, the lack of diverse offers could have resulted in a higher price than if multiple strong contenders had vied for the contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its personnel, who will receive enhanced combat environment simulation capabilities. The services delivered include sustainment and upgrades to simulation ranges, crucial for realistic training scenarios. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the contract was awarded and likely where the services are performed. Workforce implications include the potential for employment of engineers and technical specialists in the defense contracting sector in California.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The receipt of only one bid under full and open competition could indicate potential market limitations or a lack of contractor interest, which might not be ideal for taxpayer value.
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type, while incentivizing performance, can lead to higher costs if not rigorously managed and if award fees are consistently achieved without clear justification.
The long duration of the contract (over 6 years) necessitates ongoing oversight to ensure continued value and alignment with evolving military requirements.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded through 'full and open competition,' demonstrating an effort to solicit a broad range of potential bidders.
The services provided are critical for maintaining and improving realistic training environments for military personnel.
Jacobs Technology Inc. is a known entity in the engineering and technical services sector, suggesting a level of established capability.

Sector Analysis

The defense simulation and training sector is a critical component of military readiness, encompassing technologies and services that replicate combat environments for training purposes. This contract falls within the broader engineering services market, specifically supporting specialized defense infrastructure. The market for such services is often characterized by high technical barriers to entry and a limited number of specialized providers. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other contracts for simulation range sustainment and upgrades across different military branches or defense agencies.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, the data does not provide information on subcontracting plans or actual subcontracting performance with small businesses. Without this information, it is difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. However, large prime contractors like Jacobs Technology Inc. often engage small businesses for specialized support, so there could be indirect benefits if they are utilized.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure necessitates robust performance monitoring and evaluation to ensure that award fees are justified by contractor performance. Transparency would be enhanced through regular reporting requirements and potential audits. The Inspector General of the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Combat Training Systems
Military Simulation and Training
Defense Engineering Services
Naval Training Infrastructure
Simulation Range Development

Risk Flags

Single Bidder Received
Cost Plus Award Fee Contract Type
Potential for Cost Overruns
Limited Competition Outcome

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.5 million to JACOBS TECHNOLOGY INC. COMBAT ENVIRONMENT SIMULATION RANGE SUSTAINMENT AND UPGRADES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JACOBS TECHNOLOGY INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $31.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-03-27. End: 2013-09-30.

What is the track record of Jacobs Technology Inc. in performing similar combat environment simulation range sustainment and upgrade contracts for the Department of Defense?

Jacobs Technology Inc. has a significant presence in the defense sector, providing a wide range of engineering, technical, and operational support services. While specific details on their past performance solely on combat environment simulation range sustainment and upgrades are not detailed in this data snippet, their broader experience in complex engineering projects for government clients suggests a capacity to handle such requirements. A deeper dive into their contract history, past performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), and any awards or penalties associated with similar projects would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their track record. Their ability to secure this contract, even with a single bid, implies they met the initial qualifications set by the Navy.

How does the awarded amount of $31.5 million compare to the typical annual spending for sustainment and upgrades of combat environment simulation ranges?

The total award of $31.5 million over approximately 6.5 years (2379 days) translates to an average annual expenditure of roughly $4.85 million. This figure represents the total contract value, including potential award fees. To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against the average annual spending for similar sustainment and upgrade contracts across the Department of Defense or other military branches. Factors such as the complexity of the simulation range, the scope of upgrades (e.g., hardware, software, environmental realism), and the specific technologies involved would influence this comparison. Without access to a broader dataset of comparable contracts, it's difficult to definitively state whether this amount is high, low, or average.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for simulation range sustainment and upgrades?

The primary risks with a CPAF contract for simulation range sustainment and upgrades revolve around cost control and performance definition. While CPAF incentivizes performance through award fees, there's a risk that the government may pay higher total costs if the contractor consistently achieves high performance ratings, potentially exceeding what might have been achieved under a fixed-price contract. Defining clear, measurable, and objective performance criteria for award fees is crucial; vague criteria can lead to disputes or the government paying for less-than-stellar performance. Additionally, the contractor may focus efforts on achieving award fee targets rather than on the most critical sustainment or upgrade needs if not carefully managed. Robust government oversight is essential to ensure that award fees are earned and justified.

What is the potential impact of having only one bidder on this 'full and open competition' contract?

Having only one bidder in a 'full and open competition' scenario can have several impacts. Firstly, it significantly reduces the potential for competitive pricing, as the government lacks the leverage that multiple bids provide to negotiate lower prices. The single bidder may be less inclined to offer their most competitive rates. Secondly, it raises questions about the market's health and the attractiveness of the opportunity to potential competitors. This could be due to overly restrictive requirements, insufficient market research, or a lack of qualified vendors. For taxpayers, this typically means a higher likelihood of paying more than necessary for the goods or services. It also presents a risk if the single bidder fails to perform adequately, as there are limited alternative options.

How does the geographic location (California) influence the cost and availability of engineering services for this contract?

California, particularly Southern California, is a major hub for the defense industry, which can influence both the cost and availability of specialized engineering services. On one hand, the concentration of defense contractors and skilled labor in the region can lead to a competitive market, potentially driving innovation and efficiency. However, the high cost of living and doing business in California often translates to higher labor rates and overhead costs for contractors. This can result in higher contract prices compared to regions with lower operating expenses. The presence of numerous defense firms may also mean that Jacobs Technology Inc. has easier access to specialized subcontractors or talent within the state, potentially mitigating some logistical challenges.

What are the historical spending patterns for combat environment simulation range sustainment and upgrades by the Department of the Navy?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for combat environment simulation range sustainment and upgrades by the Department of the Navy would require access to historical contract databases and budget allocations. This specific data snippet only provides information for one contract. To understand broader trends, one would need to examine spending over multiple fiscal years, identify major sustainment and upgrade initiatives, and track the prime contractors involved. Key metrics to analyze would include the total annual investment in simulation range modernization, the average cost per project, and the frequency of major upgrade cycles. This contract, awarded in 2007 and ending in 2013, represents a portion of the Navy's investment during that period, but a comprehensive historical view would necessitate a much larger dataset.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc (UEI: 074103508)

Address: 1030 TITAN COURT, FORT WALTON BEACH, FL, 32547

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $31,767,000

Exercised Options: $31,767,000

Current Obligation: $31,498,778

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6893604D0019

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline