Engineering services contract for battlefield systems awarded to Science Applications International Corporation for over $217 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $217,639,592 ($217.6M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2019-09-17

End Date: 2021-09-30

Contract Duration: 744 days

Daily Burn Rate: $292.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: BATTLEFIELD SYSTEMS SUB TASK 2

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $217.6 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: BATTLEFIELD SYSTEMS SUB TASK 2 Key points: 1. The contract value of over $217 million represents a significant investment in engineering services for battlefield systems. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract were characterized by full and open competition, suggesting a potentially robust bidding process. 3. The contract type, Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), can introduce cost escalation risks if not managed closely. 4. Performance is benchmarked against similar engineering services contracts within the defense sector. 5. The award to Science Applications International Corporation positions them as a key provider in this specialized area. 6. The duration of the contract (744 days) indicates a medium-term engagement for the services provided.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $217.6 million for engineering services appears within a reasonable range for complex battlefield systems development and support. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering contracts for defense applications suggests that the pricing structure, while CPFF, is not inherently outliers. However, a detailed cost breakdown and comparison of labor rates and overhead would be necessary for a definitive value-for-money assessment. The fixed fee component provides some cost certainty, but the cost-reimbursable elements require diligent oversight to ensure efficiency.

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 presence of two bidders suggests a competitive environment, though the exact number of proposals received and the evaluation criteria would provide a clearer picture of the competition's intensity. A robust competition generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to vie for the contract, driving down prices and improving the quality of services offered. This process helps ensure that government funds are used efficiently by selecting the best value proposal.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel who will utilize the advanced battlefield systems developed or supported under this contract. Services delivered include engineering expertise crucial for the design, integration, and sustainment of complex defense technologies. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting defense operations and potentially involving personnel in Alabama (ST='AL'). Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers, technicians, and support staff within Science Applications International Corporation and its potential subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type carries inherent risks of cost overruns if not meticulously managed.
Limited visibility into the specific performance metrics and quality assurance processes for this task order.
The competitive landscape, while open, only shows two bidders, which might not represent the full spectrum of available expertise.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical battlefield systems engineering could pose supply chain or innovation risks.
The specific nature of 'Battlefield Systems Sub Task 2' is not detailed, making it difficult to assess the full scope of work and associated risks.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, maximizing the potential for competitive pricing and quality.
Science Applications International Corporation is a large, established defense contractor with a track record in complex engineering projects.
The contract is for engineering services, a critical component for maintaining and advancing military technological superiority.
The fixed fee component provides a degree of cost predictability for the government.
The contract is associated with the General Services Administration (GSA), which often implies adherence to established procurement standards.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense applications. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by continuous technological advancement and the need for sophisticated battlefield management and support systems. Companies like Science Applications International Corporation operate in a highly specialized segment, competing on technical expertise, past performance, and security clearances. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering contracts awarded by the Department of Defense for similar system development or sustainment.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (SB=false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. However, prime contractors like SAIC often engage small businesses for specialized components or services, but this contract does not appear to prioritize or mandate such engagement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Acquisition Service, which awarded the contract. The contract type (CPFF) necessitates robust financial oversight to monitor costs against the fixed fee and ensure compliance with the contract terms. Performance monitoring would likely involve regular reviews of deliverables and milestones. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Engineering Services
Battlefield Management Systems
Systems Engineering
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
General Services Administration Contracts
Science Applications International Corporation Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage potential cost escalations.
Limited public information on specific deliverables and performance metrics for this sub-task.
Potential for vendor lock-in due to the specialized nature of battlefield systems engineering.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical system development or support.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $217.6 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. BATTLEFIELD SYSTEMS SUB TASK 2

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $217.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-09-17. End: 2021-09-30.

What is the specific nature of 'Battlefield Systems Sub Task 2' and what are the key deliverables expected?

The provided data does not detail the specific sub-task or deliverables for 'Battlefield Systems Sub Task 2'. Typically, such a designation implies a specific phase or component within a larger battlefield systems project. This could range from software development, hardware integration, testing and evaluation, to logistical support analysis. Without further documentation, it's impossible to ascertain the exact scope. However, given the 'Engineering Services' NAICS code (541330), it strongly suggests a focus on design, development, and technical problem-solving related to military operational environments. The contract's duration of 744 days (approximately two years) indicates a substantial undertaking requiring significant engineering effort.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure impact cost control and potential for overruns in this contract?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure means the government reimburses the contractor for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This structure is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or involves significant uncertainty, as is common in complex engineering projects. While the fixed fee provides some cost predictability for the contractor's profit, the government bears the risk of cost overruns if actual costs exceed estimates. Effective cost control relies heavily on robust government oversight, detailed cost tracking, and stringent auditing of incurred expenses. Without diligent management, CPFF contracts can lead to higher overall costs than fixed-price alternatives.

What is Science Applications International Corporation's track record with similar large-scale defense engineering contracts?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) is a major government contractor with extensive experience in defense engineering and systems integration. They have a long history of supporting the Department of Defense across various branches and programs. SAIC frequently wins large, complex contracts involving research, development, testing, and sustainment of military technologies, including command and control systems, C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), and other battlefield-related technologies. Their track record generally includes successful execution of numerous large-value contracts, though like any major contractor, they may have faced challenges or scrutiny on specific projects. A deeper dive into their past performance ratings and any contract disputes would provide a more granular assessment.

How does the $217.6 million award compare to typical spending on battlefield systems engineering services?

The $217.6 million award for battlefield systems engineering services is substantial and falls within the upper range for individual task orders or contracts within this specialized defense sector. Large-scale engineering and systems integration projects for the military often run into hundreds of millions, and sometimes billions, of dollars over their lifecycle. This specific award represents a significant investment for the period of performance (744 days). When compared to the overall defense budget allocated to R&D, procurement, and sustainment of advanced military technologies, this contract amount is considerable but not unprecedented for a prime contractor undertaking complex engineering tasks for critical systems.

What are the potential risks associated with relying on a single contractor for this specific battlefield systems sub-task?

Relying on a single contractor, even a large one like SAIC, for a critical sub-task like 'Battlefield Systems Sub Task 2' can introduce several risks. These include potential vendor lock-in, where transitioning to another provider becomes difficult and costly. There's also a risk of reduced innovation if the contractor faces less competitive pressure to develop novel solutions. Furthermore, the contractor's financial health or strategic shifts could impact program continuity. Dependence on a single source can also create vulnerabilities in the supply chain or technical expertise if key personnel leave the contractor. Mitigating these risks often involves strong contract management, clear performance metrics, and contingency planning by the procuring agency.

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: ID04160056002

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010, SUNSET HILLS ROAD, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $229,542,995

Exercised Options: $229,542,995

Current Obligation: $217,639,592

Actual Outlays: $-16,428

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 150

Total Subaward Amount: $312,409,893

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU329

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline