Department of Defense awards $23.4M contract for engineering technical services to Engility LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,446,006 ($23.4M)

Contractor: Engility LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-09-22

End Date: 2009-11-22

Contract Duration: 1,522 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200512!008193!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0702DP001 !A!N! !Y!0077 ! !20050922!20061031!808357131!008898884!008898843!N!L-3 COMMUNICATIONS ILEX SYSTEM!1413 CANTILLION BLVD !MAYS LANDING !NJ!08330!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!+000001451963!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !20200930!B! ! !A! !A!N!Y!2!004!B! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !D!D!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: MOUNT LAUREL, BURLINGTON County, NEW JERSEY, 08054, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.4 million to ENGILITY LLC for work described as: 200512!008193!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0702DP001 !A!N! !Y!0077 ! !20050922!20061031!808357131!008898884!008898843!N!L-3 COMMUNICATIONS ILEX SYSTEM!1413 CANTILLION BLVD !MAYS LANDING !NJ!08330!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONM… Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of approximately 4 years indicates a significant, long-term need for these services. 3. The primary service category is Engineering Services, vital for defense infrastructure and operations. 4. The awardee, Engility LLC, has a track record with the Department of Defense. 5. The contract was awarded as a Time and Materials type, which can carry cost risks if not managed closely. 6. The contract was awarded to a large business, with no explicit small business set-aside noted.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $23.4 million over approximately four years for engineering technical services appears within a reasonable range for a Department of Defense contract of this nature. However, without specific benchmarks for comparable engineering technical services contracts within the Army or for similar defense electronics and communication equipment support, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Time and Materials pricing structure, while flexible, necessitates careful oversight to ensure costs do not escalate beyond initial expectations and that the labor rates are competitive.

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. The data shows 4 bids were received, which suggests a moderate level of competition for this requirement. While four bidders provide some price discovery, a higher number of bids could potentially lead to more aggressive pricing and better value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to vie for the contract, potentially driving down costs through competitive bidding.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and potentially other Department of Defense entities requiring specialized engineering and technical support. Services delivered likely include technical expertise, system engineering, integration, testing, and maintenance support for electronics and communication equipment. The contract is geographically focused on supporting Department of Defense operations, with the contractor located in Mays Landing, NJ. The contract supports a workforce of engineers and technical specialists, contributing to employment in the defense sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials (T&M) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored for labor hours and material costs.
The specific nature of 'engineering technical services' can be broad, requiring clear performance metrics to ensure effective service delivery.
Reliance on a single large business contractor for critical technical services may limit future competition or flexibility.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible process.
The contract duration suggests a stable and predictable need for these specialized services.
The contractor, Engility LLC, is an established entity within the defense contracting space.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting electronics and communication equipment. The federal government, particularly the Department of Defense, is a major consumer of such services, investing heavily in maintaining and upgrading its complex technological infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other contracts for similar engineering support, system integration, and technical services awarded to large defense contractors, often in the range of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars annually for significant programs.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the data indicates the awardee is a large business. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses within this award. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this contract are dependent on the prime contractor's subcontracting strategy, rather than a mandated set-aside.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting and program management offices. Performance monitoring, invoicing review, and compliance checks are standard oversight mechanisms. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS-NG. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Engineering Services Contracts
Army Communications and Electronics Procurement
Information Technology Support Services
Defense Research and Development Support

Risk Flags

Time and Materials contract type requires close monitoring to control costs.
Potential for scope creep in engineering technical services if not clearly defined.
Dependence on a single large contractor may limit future flexibility.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.4 million to ENGILITY LLC. 200512!008193!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0702DP001 !A!N! !Y!0077 ! !20050922!20061031!808357131!008898884!008898843!N!L-3 COMMUNICATIONS ILEX SYSTEM!1413 CANTILLION BLVD !MAYS LANDING !NJ!08330!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!+000001451963!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENGILITY LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-09-22. End: 2009-11-22.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar engineering technical services contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending for similar engineering technical services contracts by the Department of the Army reveals a consistent and substantial investment in maintaining and upgrading its technological capabilities. Over the past decade, the Army has awarded numerous contracts in this category, ranging from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars annually. These contracts often support critical areas such as communications, electronics, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems. Spending patterns are influenced by evolving threats, technological advancements, and budget allocations. Contracts can vary in type, including cost-plus, fixed-price, and time-and-materials, with the latter, like the one awarded to L-3 Communications ILEX SYSTEM, often used for services where the scope or duration is less defined. The total annual expenditure in this domain typically fluctuates based on major program requirements and strategic priorities.

How does the awarded price of $23.4 million compare to market rates for similar engineering services?

Benchmarking the $23.4 million contract value against market rates for similar engineering services requires a detailed understanding of the specific technical expertise, labor categories, and duration involved. For a contract spanning approximately four years (1522 days) with a total value of $23.4 million, the average annual value is roughly $5.85 million. This translates to a daily average expenditure of approximately $15,400. Given that this contract is for specialized engineering and technical services within the defense sector, which often commands premium rates due to security clearances, specialized knowledge, and demanding operational environments, this figure appears plausible. However, a definitive comparison would necessitate access to proprietary rate data for comparable roles and services within the defense industry and an analysis of the specific deliverables and performance expectations outlined in the contract.

What are the potential risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this service?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract type, such as the one awarded to L-3 Communications ILEX SYSTEM for engineering technical services, is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M contracts do not have a ceiling on the total cost, meaning the government pays for the actual labor hours expended and the cost of materials used. If not managed diligently, contractors may be incentivized to extend labor hours or use more expensive materials than strictly necessary, leading to costs exceeding initial estimates. Effective oversight, including rigorous monitoring of labor hours, verification of material costs, and clear performance standards, is crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the government receives good value for its investment.

What is the contractor's track record with the Department of Defense for similar services?

L-3 Communications ILEX SYSTEM (now part of L3Harris Technologies) has a significant track record of performing contracts for the Department of Defense, including services related to engineering, technical support, and electronics. While this specific contract (DAAB0702DP001) was awarded in 2005, the company has historically been a major defense contractor involved in various complex projects. Their experience typically encompasses a wide range of defense systems, requiring specialized engineering and technical expertise. Assessing their performance on this particular contract would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, any contract modifications, and delivery records. Generally, companies of this size operating in the defense sector are expected to have established processes for quality control and contract management, though individual contract performance can vary.

How does the level of competition (4 bidders) impact price discovery and taxpayer value?

The level of competition, indicated by four bidders for this contract, provides a moderate basis for price discovery. With four bids, the government has a range of pricing options to evaluate, allowing for comparison and negotiation to achieve a reasonable price. However, a higher number of bidders, often seen in highly competitive markets (e.g., 8-10 or more), can typically lead to more aggressive pricing as companies strive to win the contract. While four bidders suggest some level of market interest and competition, it might not represent the most optimal scenario for maximizing taxpayer value compared to a situation with more robust competition. The government's procurement strategy and the specific nature of the required services also play a role in attracting bidders.

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

Solicitation ID: W15P7T05RB266

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Engility Corporation (UEI: 783837672)

Address: 3750 CENTERVIEW DR, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,250,784

Exercised Options: $14,168,792

Current Obligation: $23,446,006

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DAAB0702DP001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline