Air Force awards $43.4M for C2 Facility support, with SAIC as prime contractor

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $43,355,775 ($43.4M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-08-24

End Date: 2024-02-27

Contract Duration: 2,743 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF U.S. AIR FORCE (USAF) NEW COMMAND AND CONTROL (C2) FACILITY (C2F) PRE-INSTALLATION AND CHECKOUT (PITCO) AND INSTALLATION SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: WILLISTON, CHITTENDEN County, VERMONT, 05495

State: Vermont Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $43.4 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF U.S. AIR FORCE (USAF) NEW COMMAND AND CONTROL (C2) FACILITY (C2F) PRE-INSTALLATION AND CHECKOUT (PITCO) AND INSTALLATION SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in critical command and control infrastructure. 2. The use of Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing indicates potential for cost overruns if not closely managed. 3. A long performance period suggests a complex, multi-year project requiring sustained oversight. 4. The contract was awarded via full and open competition, implying a competitive bidding process. 5. The prime contractor, SAIC, has a substantial presence in defense IT and engineering services. 6. This contract supports the Air Force's modernization efforts for its command and control capabilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $43.4 million over approximately 7.5 years (2743 days) for pre-installation, checkout, and installation support of a C2 facility appears to be within a reasonable range for complex engineering and installation projects of this nature. However, the CPFF contract type introduces inherent risk. Without detailed breakdowns of labor categories, material costs, and fixed fees, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar C2 facility construction or upgrade projects would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation of pricing and value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 4 delivery orders suggests that the contract has been actively utilized. The level of competition is generally positive for price discovery, but the specific number of bidders for the initial award or subsequent orders is not provided, which would offer a clearer picture of the competitive intensity.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and innovative solutions, reducing the risk of inflated costs.

Public Impact

The U.S. Air Force benefits from enhanced command and control capabilities, crucial for operational effectiveness. Services delivered include pre-installation, checkout, and installation support for a new C2 facility. The geographic impact is primarily at the specific Air Force installation where the C2 facility is located (Vermont, based on SN field). The contract supports a workforce of engineers, technicians, and project managers involved in the installation and support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense infrastructure. The market for defense engineering and installation services is substantial, driven by ongoing military modernization and facility upgrades. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve large-scale construction, IT integration, and specialized facility support for government entities. SAIC operates in a competitive landscape with other major defense contractors vying for similar projects.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (SB field is false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this prime contract. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans or performance. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though large prime contractors often engage small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), as indicated by the 'sa' field. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's terms and conditions, including performance metrics and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, but detailed project-specific oversight reports are often internal or classified. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, air-force, engineering-services, command-and-control, facility-support, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, science-applications-international-corporation, vermont, large-contract, it-infrastructure, modernization

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $43.4 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. IGF::OT::IGF U.S. AIR FORCE (USAF) NEW COMMAND AND CONTROL (C2) FACILITY (C2F) PRE-INSTALLATION AND CHECKOUT (PITCO) AND INSTALLATION SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $43.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-08-24. End: 2024-02-27.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar Air Force Command and Control Facility (C2F) projects over the last five years?

Analyzing historical spending for similar Air Force C2F projects requires access to detailed contract databases and budget allocations. Generally, investments in C2 infrastructure are substantial and ongoing, reflecting the need for secure, resilient, and technologically advanced communication and operational platforms. Spending fluctuates based on modernization cycles, geopolitical threats, and specific platform upgrades. Projects can range from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on scale, complexity, and technological integration. Factors like new facility construction versus upgrades, integration of new communication systems, and cybersecurity enhancements significantly influence costs. Without specific project identifiers, a precise historical comparison is difficult, but the trend is towards increased investment in resilient and modernized C2 capabilities.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure for this contract compare to industry standards for similar engineering services?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure is common for complex projects where the scope is not fully defined at the outset or involves significant research and development. For engineering services like C2 facility support, CPFF allows for flexibility as costs are reimbursed, plus a fixed fee representing profit. Industry standards suggest that while CPFF provides flexibility, it carries a higher risk of cost overruns compared to fixed-price contracts. The 'fixed fee' component aims to incentivize the contractor to control costs, as their profit is capped. Benchmarking would involve comparing the fixed fee percentage and the total cost reimbursement against similar projects. A typical fixed fee might range from 5-15% of the estimated cost, depending on the project's risk and complexity. Close monitoring by the government is crucial to ensure costs remain reasonable and the fixed fee is justified.

What is Science Applications International Corporation's (SAIC) track record with similar large-scale defense infrastructure projects?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has a well-established track record in providing a wide range of services to the Department of Defense, including large-scale infrastructure, IT, and engineering support. They have been involved in numerous complex projects supporting command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) systems, as well as facility modernization and sustainment. SAIC's experience often includes system integration, cybersecurity, and lifecycle support for critical defense assets. Their performance on past contracts, including any awards, penalties, or significant challenges, would be detailed in government performance assessment databases (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS). Generally, SAIC is considered a major player capable of handling substantial defense contracts, but specific project outcomes vary.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract's installation and support services?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a contract like this, involving pre-installation, checkout, and installation support for a C2 facility, would typically focus on schedule adherence, quality of work, cost control, and technical performance. Specific KPIs might include: on-time completion of milestones, adherence to design specifications, successful system integration and testing (checkout), minimal defects or rework required, compliance with safety regulations, and effective management of resources. For a CPFF contract, tracking actual costs against the estimated cost baseline is also a critical KPI. The government's quality assurance personnel and contracting officer's representatives (CORs) would monitor these KPIs throughout the contract performance period, often documented in regular progress reports and performance assessments.

Are there any known risks associated with the specific Command and Control (C2) systems or facility type being supported by this contract?

The specific risks associated with the C2 systems and facility type are not detailed in the provided data. However, general risks for C2 facilities include cybersecurity vulnerabilities, integration challenges with legacy systems, ensuring operational resilience against physical or electronic attacks, and the rapid obsolescence of technology. Modern C2 systems often involve complex networks, data fusion, and advanced communication technologies, which can be prone to integration issues and require specialized expertise. Facility-specific risks might include environmental compliance, site security, and ensuring the physical infrastructure can support the demanding requirements of sensitive C2 operations. The CPFF contract type suggests that some level of uncertainty or evolving requirements is anticipated, which inherently carries risk.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering Services

Product/Service Code: INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENTINSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002416R3230

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010 SUNSET HILLS RD, 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: $47,207,075

Exercised Options: $47,207,075

Current Obligation: $43,355,775

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 25

Total Subaward Amount: $20,047,778

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4119

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2016-08-24

Current End Date: 2024-02-27

Potential End Date: 2024-02-27 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2024-04-02

More Contracts from Science Applications International Corporation

View all Science Applications International Corporation federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending