Leidos Inc. awarded $69.8M task order for navigation systems, extending through 2037

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $69,856,447 ($69.9M)

Contractor: Leidos, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2018-03-12

End Date: 2037-09-26

Contract Duration: 7,138 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: TASK ORDER 2

Place of Performance

Location: GAITHERSBURG, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20878

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $69.9 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: TASK ORDER 2 Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant long-term commitment for navigation system support. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process for this award. 3. The extended duration indicates a need for sustained, reliable service delivery. 4. Cost Plus Fixed Fee pricing structure requires careful monitoring of contractor costs. 5. This award falls within the manufacturing sector for aeronautical and nautical instruments. 6. The task order is a substantial portion of the overall contract value.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award of $69.8 million over its extended period appears reasonable given the scope of navigation system support. Benchmarking against similar long-term contracts for complex system maintenance and upgrades is necessary for a definitive value assessment. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, while allowing for flexibility, necessitates diligent oversight to ensure costs remain within acceptable parameters and that the fixed fee adequately compensates the contractor for their efforts without excessive profit.

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 bids. The presence of multiple bidders, as suggested by the 'no' field indicating 2 bids, typically fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The specific number of bidders and the evaluation criteria would provide further insight into the intensity of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that is designed to secure the best value for the government. Full and open competition generally leads to more favorable pricing and a wider selection of qualified contractors.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits from the continued operation and maintenance of critical navigation systems. Services delivered ensure the safety and efficiency of air traffic control and navigation for civilian and potentially military aircraft. The geographic impact is nationwide, supporting air travel across the United States. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles for system maintenance, repair, and potential upgrades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the "Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing" sector, specifically NAICS code 334511. This industry is characterized by high technological complexity and stringent regulatory requirements due to its critical role in safety and operations. Spending in this sector is often driven by government procurement for defense, aviation, and maritime applications. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale contracts for similar navigation and guidance systems within the Department of Transportation and the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside (ss=false, sb=false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by this specific award. The primary contractor, Leidos, Inc., is a large business. Analysis of Leidos's overall subcontracting plan with the agency would be needed to determine the broader impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the contracting agency. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure necessitates detailed financial oversight to scrutinize costs incurred by Leidos, Inc. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms, and the Inspector General for the Department of Transportation would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this award.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

sector-other, agency-department-of-transportation, agency-federal-aviation-administration, contract-type-delivery-order, competition-full-and-open, pricing-cost-plus-fixed-fee, duration-long-term, geography-nationwide, contractor-leidos-inc, naics-334511

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $69.9 million to LEIDOS, INC.. TASK ORDER 2

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $69.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-03-12. End: 2037-09-26.

What is Leidos, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Transportation and the FAA for similar navigation system contracts?

Leidos, Inc. has a substantial history of contracting with the Department of Transportation and its agencies, including the FAA. They are a major government contractor with extensive experience in IT, systems engineering, and logistics, often supporting complex defense and civilian programs. For navigation systems specifically, Leidos has been involved in various projects related to air traffic management, surveillance, and communication systems. A detailed review of their past performance on similar FAA contracts would involve examining contract databases for awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any documented issues or successes. Their established presence suggests a capacity to handle large, long-term contracts like this task order, but specific performance metrics on analogous navigation system work are crucial for a complete assessment.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure compare to other contract types for similar navigation system services?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined, or when there is a high degree of uncertainty in the costs associated with performance. For navigation system services, which can involve research, development, integration, and long-term maintenance, CPFF offers flexibility. However, it places a greater burden on the government to monitor contractor costs closely, as the contractor is reimbursed for actual costs plus a predetermined fixed fee. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF generally carries more cost risk for the government but can be advantageous when innovation or adaptation is required. Other types like Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) introduce performance incentives, which might be more suitable for driving specific outcomes. The choice of CPFF here suggests the FAA prioritized flexibility and contractor effort reimbursement over strict cost certainty at the outset.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this task order?

While the provided data does not explicitly list Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or Service Level Agreements (SLAs), they are critical components of any task order, especially one of this magnitude and duration. For navigation systems, typical KPIs/SLAs would likely focus on system availability (uptime), reliability (mean time between failures), response times for maintenance and repair, accuracy and precision of navigation data, and compliance with stringent safety and regulatory standards set by the FAA. Performance metrics would also likely include adherence to delivery schedules for any upgrades or modifications. The effectiveness of the CPFF contract hinges on the government's ability to monitor and enforce these KPIs/SLAs, ensuring that Leidos, Inc. meets the required performance standards throughout the contract period.

What is the historical spending trend for navigation system manufacturing and support within the Federal Aviation Administration?

Historical spending trends for navigation system manufacturing and support within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are generally substantial and consistent, driven by the continuous need to maintain and modernize air traffic control infrastructure. The FAA invests heavily in ensuring the safety and efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS). Spending in this category typically includes procurement of new systems, upgrades to existing infrastructure (like GPS augmentation systems, radar, communication equipment), and long-term sustainment and maintenance contracts. While specific annual figures fluctuate based on modernization cycles and budget allocations, the overall trend indicates a sustained, significant investment. This $69.8 million task order, extending over many years, aligns with the long-term nature of such critical infrastructure investments, reflecting a consistent commitment to advanced navigation technologies.

Are there any known risks associated with the specific navigation technologies or systems covered by this task order?

The specific navigation technologies or systems covered by this task order are not detailed in the provided data, making a precise risk assessment challenging. However, general risks associated with advanced navigation systems include technological obsolescence, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, integration challenges with existing infrastructure, and reliance on external factors like satellite signals (e.g., GPS). For aeronautical and nautical systems, failure or degradation can have severe safety implications. The FAA rigorously tests and certifies all navigation equipment, but ongoing risks include potential interference, spoofing, or the need for frequent software updates to counter emerging threats or improve performance. The long duration of the contract (through 2037) amplifies the risk of technological shifts that could render current systems less effective or obsolete, necessitating proactive management and potential contract modifications.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingNavigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments ManufacturingSearch, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.

Address: 9737 WASHINGTONIAN BLVD, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20878

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $117,263,348

Exercised Options: $69,856,447

Current Obligation: $69,856,447

Actual Outlays: $46,997,512

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAWA17D00040

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2018-03-12

Current End Date: 2037-09-26

Potential End Date: 2037-09-26 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2026-03-23

More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.

View all Leidos, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Transportation Contracts

View all Department of Transportation contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending