DOT's $26.6M FAA telecommunications contract awarded to Noblis, Inc. for engineering services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,579,975 ($26.6M)

Contractor: Noblis, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2017-04-07

End Date: 2026-08-09

Contract Duration: 3,411 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF OTHER FUNCTIONS FAA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE-2 (FTI-2) PROGRAM AND ACQUISITION SUPPORT

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 $26.6 million to NOBLIS, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF OTHER FUNCTIONS FAA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE-2 (FTI-2) PROGRAM AND ACQUISITION SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Time and Materials, which can pose cost control risks if not managed effectively. 3. The duration of the contract is substantial, spanning over 9 years. 4. The contract is for engineering services, a critical component of infrastructure development. 5. The geographic location is Washington D.C., a hub for federal contracting.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $26.6 million over approximately 9 years for telecommunications infrastructure support appears reasonable given the scope of engineering services required. However, without specific benchmarks for similar FAA telecommunications projects or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Time and Materials pricing structure necessitates close monitoring to ensure costs remain within expected parameters and do not escalate due to inefficiencies or scope creep. Comparing this to other large-scale federal engineering support contracts would provide better context.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through a full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The fact that it was competed suggests a deliberate effort to solicit proposals from multiple vendors, which is generally expected to foster price discovery and potentially lead to more competitive pricing. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open competition is a positive indicator for market engagement.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging a wider range of potential contractors to bid, which can drive down prices and improve the quality of services received.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits from this contract through enhanced telecommunications infrastructure support. The services provided are critical for maintaining and improving the national airspace system's communication capabilities. The contract's impact is primarily national, supporting the FAA's operational needs across the United States. The contract supports a workforce of engineers and technical specialists, contributing to employment in the engineering services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed.
Long contract duration increases the risk of obsolescence or changing technological needs.
Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess effectiveness.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process.
Contract supports critical FAA telecommunications infrastructure, vital for national airspace safety.
Noblis, Inc. is a known entity in government contracting, potentially indicating a level of established capability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting telecommunications infrastructure for the Federal Aviation Administration. The market for federal engineering services is substantial, with agencies like the FAA relying heavily on specialized firms for complex technical support. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by federal agencies for critical infrastructure projects, considering factors like duration, scope, and pricing models.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, Noblis, Inc., is likely a large business, and any subcontracting opportunities would be at their discretion.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration contracting officers and program managers. The Time and Materials nature of the contract necessitates rigorous oversight to ensure that labor hours and material costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract's objectives. Transparency would be enhanced through regular reporting requirements and potential reviews by the Department of Transportation's Office of Inspector General, especially concerning cost and performance.

Related Government Programs

FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure
Engineering Services Contracts
Federal Aviation Administration IT Support
Department of Transportation Contracts

Risk Flags

Time and Materials Pricing
Long Contract Duration
Potential for Technological Obsolescence
Need for Robust Oversight

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $26.6 million to NOBLIS, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF OTHER FUNCTIONS FAA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE-2 (FTI-2) PROGRAM AND ACQUISITION SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NOBLIS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-04-07. End: 2026-08-09.

What is Noblis, Inc.'s track record with the Federal Aviation Administration and similar agencies?

Noblis, Inc. has a significant history of contracting with the federal government, including the FAA. They are known for providing a range of services, often in areas of science, engineering, and technology. For the FAA, Noblis has been involved in various projects related to air traffic management, systems engineering, and telecommunications. Their performance history with the FAA and other agencies like the Department of Defense and NASA would typically be assessed through past performance evaluations during the bidding process. While specific details of past performance on this particular contract vehicle (FTI-2) are not provided, Noblis's general profile suggests they are an established contractor capable of handling complex federal requirements. A deeper dive would involve reviewing CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) reports if available.

How does the $26.6 million contract value compare to similar FAA telecommunications infrastructure projects?

Directly comparing the $26.6 million value of this contract to similar FAA telecommunications infrastructure projects requires access to a database of historical FAA contracts and their specific scopes. However, for a contract spanning nearly 9 years (April 2017 to August 2026) and covering engineering services for telecommunications infrastructure, this value appears to be within a reasonable range for a large federal agency. Projects involving national-level infrastructure, such as those managed by the FAA, often involve significant investment. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure means the final cost is dependent on actual hours worked and materials used, making direct comparisons difficult without knowing the exact effort expended. Benchmarking against other T&M contracts for similar engineering services within the federal government would provide a more robust comparison.

What are the primary risks associated with a Time and Materials contract of this duration for telecommunications engineering?

The primary risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract, especially one of this duration (over 9 years) and scope (telecommunications infrastructure engineering), revolve around cost control and potential inefficiencies. T&M contracts pay the contractor for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred, plus a fixed fee or profit. This structure can incentivize longer task durations or less efficient work if not rigorously monitored, potentially leading to cost overruns. For telecommunications infrastructure, which is subject to rapid technological change, a long-duration T&M contract also carries the risk of the technology becoming outdated before the contract concludes, requiring careful management and potential modifications. Ensuring adequate oversight, clear task definitions, and robust reporting mechanisms are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' approach likely to be for this type of engineering service contract?

The 'full and open competition' approach is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring fair pricing and access to the widest range of qualified contractors for federal service contracts. For engineering services supporting complex telecommunications infrastructure, this approach allows the FAA to solicit proposals from numerous firms, potentially leading to innovative solutions and competitive pricing. The effectiveness hinges on the clarity of the solicitation requirements, the evaluation criteria, and the number and quality of bids received. While the data doesn't specify the number of bidders, the open competition itself signals an intent to maximize market participation, which is beneficial for achieving value for taxpayer money and ensuring the government selects the best-suited contractor.

What are the potential implications of the contract's geographic focus (Washington D.C.) on its execution and cost?

The contract's primary location being Washington D.C. (st: DC, sn: DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA) can have several implications. Firstly, it suggests that the services may be directly supporting FAA headquarters or critical infrastructure located within the D.C. metropolitan area. This location often means higher labor costs due to the cost of living and a competitive market for skilled professionals. However, it also places the contractor in close proximity to FAA decision-makers and stakeholders, potentially facilitating communication and collaboration. The concentration of federal agencies and contractors in D.C. can also mean a readily available pool of specialized talent, but competition for that talent can drive up rates. The specific nature of the telecommunications infrastructure being supported will ultimately dictate the true impact of the geographic focus.

How does the contract's duration (3411 days) influence the assessment of its value and risk?

A duration of 3411 days, approximately 9.3 years, significantly influences the assessment of this contract's value and risk. On the value side, a long duration can indicate a stable, long-term need for the services, potentially allowing for economies of scale and deeper expertise development by the contractor. It can also provide continuity for critical infrastructure support. However, the extended timeline significantly increases risk, particularly in a rapidly evolving field like telecommunications. Technological obsolescence is a major concern; the infrastructure and systems supported today might be outdated by the contract's end. Furthermore, market conditions, regulatory environments, and agency priorities can shift over nearly a decade, potentially rendering the original contract scope less relevant or requiring costly modifications. Effective contract management and flexibility are paramount to mitigate these long-term risks.

Industry Classification

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

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: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2002 EDMUND HALLEY DR, RESTON, VA, 20191

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,236,157

Exercised Options: $26,579,975

Current Obligation: $26,579,975

Actual Outlays: $19,989,433

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 21

Total Subaward Amount: $5,187,582

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAWA17D00014

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline