DoD awards $35M engineering services task order to ADAMS COMMUNICATION & ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, INC. for modification installations

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,094,936 ($35.1M)

Contractor: Adams Communication & Engineering Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-09-16

End Date: 2020-04-15

Contract Duration: 1,673 days

Daily Burn Rate: $21.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF AWARD OF TASK ORDER 0015 FOR MODIFICATION INSTALLATIONS

Place of Performance

Location: JACKSONVILLE, ONSLOW County, NORTH CAROLINA, 28540

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $35.1 million to ADAMS COMMUNICATION & ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF AWARD OF TASK ORDER 0015 FOR MODIFICATION INSTALLATIONS Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The task order duration of 1673 days indicates a long-term need for these engineering services. 3. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. The award was made by the Department of the Army, a significant component of the Department of Defense. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to engineering services. 6. The contract was awarded in North Carolina, indicating a specific geographic focus for the installations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific task order is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar modification installation contracts. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces inherent risk for cost control, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee. While the fixed fee provides some predictability, the total cost can escalate if the base costs increase significantly. Without data on the number of bids received or the price range of competing offers, it's difficult to definitively assess if the $35 million represents a competitive price for the scope of work.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This task order was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 3 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific requirement. While competition is generally positive, the exact number of bidders can influence price discovery. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing, whereas a lower number might indicate less intense price pressure.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best value through a robust bidding process. The fact that three companies submitted bids suggests that the government received multiple proposals, which can help ensure a reasonable price and quality of service.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from the modification installations, likely enhancing existing infrastructure or capabilities. Engineering services are delivered, supporting the operational readiness and modernization efforts of the military. The geographic impact is concentrated in North Carolina, where the modification installations will take place. The contract supports the defense industrial base and potentially creates or sustains jobs within the engineering and construction sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Limited information on the specific nature of 'modification installations' makes it difficult to assess the full scope and potential risks.
The duration of the contract (over 4 years) requires sustained oversight to ensure continued value and performance.
The benchmark for 'fair' value is based on limited comparative data for this specific type of task order.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a fair and transparent procurement process.
Multiple bids (3) were received, suggesting a degree of market interest and potential for competitive pricing.
The contract supports critical defense infrastructure needs for the Department of the Army.
The fixed fee component of the CPFF contract provides some cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically related to defense infrastructure modifications. The Engineering Services market is substantial, encompassing a wide range of activities from design to project management. For defense contracts, spending in this area is often driven by modernization, maintenance, and upgrade requirements for military facilities and equipment. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale modification and installation contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or its branches for similar types of work.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (sb) was false and the small business set-aside (ss) was also false. This suggests that the contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit indication of significant small business subcontracting goals being a primary driver for this award. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular task order appears limited, though larger prime contractors may engage small businesses in their supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this task order would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms and conditions of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, requiring detailed reporting on costs and progress. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award being publicly available, but detailed performance metrics and cost breakdowns may not be readily accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense - Facilities Engineering
Army Corps of Engineers - Construction and Engineering Services
Military Construction Projects
Defense Infrastructure Modernization Programs

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage potential cost escalations.
The specific scope of 'modification installations' is not detailed, necessitating clear definition and monitoring.
Long contract duration (over 4 years) demands sustained program management and performance evaluation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $35.1 million to ADAMS COMMUNICATION & ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF AWARD OF TASK ORDER 0015 FOR MODIFICATION INSTALLATIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ADAMS COMMUNICATION & ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $35.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-09-16. End: 2020-04-15.

What is the specific nature of the 'modification installations' covered by this task order, and what are the key performance indicators (KPIs) for success?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the 'modification installations.' These could range from upgrades to existing military facilities, installation of new equipment, or structural enhancements. Key performance indicators (KPIs) for success would typically be defined in the task order's statement of work (SOW) and could include metrics such as on-time completion, adherence to budget (within the CPFF structure), quality of workmanship, compliance with safety regulations, and successful integration of modifications. Without the SOW, a precise definition of KPIs is not possible, but they would be crucial for the Department of the Army to monitor the contractor's performance and ensure the intended outcomes are achieved.

How does the $35 million award compare to the average cost of similar engineering services task orders for modification installations within the Department of Defense?

Directly comparing the $35 million award to an average cost for similar task orders is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of historical defense contracts for 'modification installations' and their specific scopes of work. The nature of modifications can vary widely, impacting cost significantly. However, a $35 million task order for engineering services over approximately 4.5 years (1673 days) suggests a substantial project. To establish a benchmark, one would need to analyze contracts with similar NAICS codes (541330), contract types (CPFF), and project descriptions (modifications/installations) awarded by the Department of the Army or other DoD branches. Factors like geographic location, complexity, and urgency also influence pricing, making a simple dollar-for-dollar comparison difficult.

What are the potential risks associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this specific task order, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

The primary risk with a CPFF contract is the potential for cost overruns, as the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a fixed fee. If the contractor's actual costs exceed initial estimates, the government pays the higher amount, although the fee remains fixed. This can occur due to unforeseen complexities, scope creep, or inefficient performance. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust government oversight, detailed cost tracking and auditing, clear definition of allowable costs in the contract, and strong program management to monitor progress and control expenditures. The fixed fee itself incentivizes the contractor to manage costs to some extent, as exceeding them impacts their overall profit margin (fee relative to costs).

Given that this is a task order under a larger contract vehicle, what was the original competition for the base contract, and how does that influence the current award?

The provided data indicates this is a 'DELIVERY ORDER' (aw) which implies it is a task order issued under a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or similar vehicle. The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' (ct) designation likely refers to the competition for this specific task order, not necessarily the original base contract. Task orders issued under IDIQ vehicles can be competed among pre-qualified vendors on the base contract, or awarded based on pre-negotiated terms. If the base contract itself was awarded through full and open competition, it suggests a broad initial vetting of potential contractors. However, the competition for this specific task order (with 3 bidders) is the most direct indicator of price discovery for this particular work.

What is the track record of ADAMS COMMUNICATION & ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, INC. in performing similar engineering services contracts for the Department of Defense?

Assessing the track record of ADAMS COMMUNICATION & ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, INC. requires accessing contract performance databases (like the Federal Procurement Data System - FPDS) and reviewing past performance evaluations. Without direct access to these detailed records, it's difficult to provide a specific assessment. Generally, agencies evaluate past performance as a key factor in source selection. A company with a history of successful, on-time, and within-budget (or well-managed cost-plus) performance on similar defense contracts would be viewed favorably. Conversely, a history of performance issues, disputes, or cost overruns could raise concerns. The fact that they were awarded this significant task order suggests they likely met the performance requirements during the selection process.

What are the historical spending patterns for engineering services related to modification installations within the Department of the Army, and how does this award fit into that trend?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for 'modification installations' within the Department of the Army would involve examining aggregate data over several fiscal years, likely categorized under broader headings such as 'Facilities Engineering,' 'Maintenance and Repair,' or specific construction/modification accounts. This $35 million award represents a significant single investment in such activities. To understand its place in the trend, one would need to compare its value against the total annual spending on similar projects. If overall spending in this category has been increasing, this award might be part of a larger modernization or upgrade initiative. Conversely, if spending has been declining, this could represent a strategic reallocation of resources or a particularly large-scale project.

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: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10740 PARKRIDGE BLVD STE 700, RESTON, VA, 20191

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $42,473,625

Exercised Options: $42,473,625

Current Obligation: $35,094,936

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W15P7T10DD420

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline