DoD's $29.6M engineering services contract to Integrated Concepts & Research Corp. awarded on a sole-source basis

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,658,758 ($29.7M)

Contractor: Integrated Concepts and Research Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-09-06

End Date: 2012-09-30

Contract Duration: 3,677 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200212!003607!2100!AE07 !TACOM - WARREN !DAAE0702CL062 !A!N! !N! !20020906!20031130!926920703!080900509!078203361!N!INTEGRATED CONCEPTS & RESEARCH!1033 N FAIRFAX ST !ALEXANDRIA !VA!22314!58472!059!51!OAKTON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000002844522!N!N!000000000000!AC43!RDTE/TANK - AUTOMOTIVE-ADV TECH DEV !A4B!NON-COMBAT VEHICLES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541330!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !N!Z!D!N!U!1!001!N!5A!A!Y!Z! ! !N!A!N!N!E! ! ! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22303, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.7 million to INTEGRATED CONCEPTS AND RESEARCH CORPORATION for work described as: 200212!003607!2100!AE07 !TACOM - WARREN !DAAE0702CL062 !A!N! !N! !20020906!20031130!926920703!080900509!078203361!N!INTEGRATED CONCEPTS & RESEARCH!1033 N FAIRFAX ST !ALEXANDRIA !VA!22314!58472!059!51!OAKTON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000002844522!N!N!000000000000!AC43!RDTE/TANK - AUTOM… Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential price overruns and limited market exploration. 2. Significant contract duration of over 10 years suggests a long-term need for specialized engineering expertise. 3. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' pricing structure may incentivize cost escalation without clear performance incentives. 4. Focus on 'RDTE/TANK - AUTOMOTIVE-ADV TECH DEV' indicates a specialized niche within defense R&D. 5. Contractor's location in Alexandria, VA, places it within a hub of government contracting activity. 6. Lack of small business participation noted, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller innovative firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $29.6 million over more than 10 years for engineering services warrants scrutiny. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to benchmark against market rates or similar contracts. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) structure, while common for R&D, can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly, as the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus a fixed fee. This pricing model offers less incentive for cost efficiency compared to fixed-price contracts. Further analysis would require access to detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or is the only source capable of meeting the requirement. The lack of competition means potential savings from a bidding process were not realized, and it limits the government's ability to explore alternative solutions or pricing structures. The rationale for sole-sourcing should be clearly documented and justified.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be getting the best possible price, as competition is a key driver for cost reduction. It also limits opportunities for other businesses to compete for government work.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the TACOM (Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command) for advanced technology development in non-combat vehicles. The contract delivers specialized engineering services crucial for research, development, and testing of advanced automotive technologies. Geographic impact is concentrated around the contractor's location in Alexandria, Virginia, and potentially at DoD research facilities. Workforce implications include the employment of engineers and technical specialists by Integrated Concepts & Research Corporation.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potential taxpayer savings.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure may not sufficiently incentivize cost control.
Long contract duration (over 10 years) increases exposure to potential cost overruns and scope creep.
Lack of transparency regarding the specific engineering services and their necessity for sole-source justification.
No indication of small business participation or subcontracting plans.

Positive Signals

Contract addresses a specialized area of defense technology development (advanced automotive tech).
Long-term nature suggests a sustained and critical need for the contractor's expertise.
Contractor is located in a region with significant defense industry presence.
Clear identification of the procuring agency (TACOM) and the service type (Engineering Services).

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting advanced technology development for the Department of Defense. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by the need for innovation and modernization in military equipment. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more detail on the specific services rendered, but large, long-term engineering contracts with the DoD often run into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. This contract's focus on automotive and tank technologies places it within a niche but critical segment of defense R&D.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is also no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, Integrated Concepts & Research Corporation, is expected to perform the majority of the work internally. Consequently, this contract may not directly contribute to the growth or opportunities for small businesses within the defense engineering sector, nor does it leverage the agility and innovation often found in smaller firms through subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Defense, likely managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) given the 'sa' field. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) structure necessitates robust oversight to ensure that all costs incurred are allowable, reasonable, and allocable to the contract. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature and the classification of some details ('NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED'). Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Research and Development
TACOM Advanced Technology Development Programs
Non-Combat Vehicle Development
Engineering and Technical Services Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus contract type
Long contract duration
Lack of small business participation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.7 million to INTEGRATED CONCEPTS AND RESEARCH CORPORATION. 200212!003607!2100!AE07 !TACOM - WARREN !DAAE0702CL062 !A!N! !N! !20020906!20031130!926920703!080900509!078203361!N!INTEGRATED CONCEPTS & RESEARCH!1033 N FAIRFAX ST !ALEXANDRIA !VA!22314!58472!059!51!OAKTON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000002844522!N!N!000000000000!AC43!RDTE/TANK - AUTOMOTIVE-ADV TECH DEV !A4B!NON-COMBAT VEHICLES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541330!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !N!Z!D!N!U!1!001!N!5A!A!Y!Z! ! !N!A!N!N!E! ! ! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is INTEGRATED CONCEPTS AND RESEARCH 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 $29.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-09-06. End: 2012-09-30.

What specific advanced technologies were developed or researched under this contract, and what was their impact on non-combat vehicle capabilities?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'RDTE/TANK - AUTOMOTIVE-ADV TECH DEV' and falls under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 (Engineering Services). However, the specific details of the research and development (RDTE) conducted, the technologies developed, and their subsequent impact on non-combat vehicle capabilities are not discernible from the abbreviated data. Such information would typically be found in contract performance reports, technical documentation, or program reviews. Without these details, it's impossible to quantify the technological advancements or their contribution to military readiness or efficiency. The contract's long duration (over 10 years) suggests a significant R&D effort, but the nature of that effort remains classified or not publicly disclosed in this dataset.

How does the $29.6 million total award amount compare to similar engineering services contracts for defense R&D over a 10+ year period?

Benchmarking the $29.6 million award for Integrated Concepts & Research Corporation against similar defense R&D engineering services contracts over a 10+ year period is challenging without more specific comparative data. However, given the duration (over 10 years) and the nature of defense R&D, this amount represents a moderate investment. Larger, more complex programs, especially those involving major weapon systems or advanced materials, can easily exceed hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars over similar timeframes. Conversely, smaller, more focused R&D efforts might be in the single-digit millions. The sole-source nature of this award complicates direct comparison, as competitive contracts often drive prices down. To provide a more accurate comparison, one would need to analyze contracts with similar NAICS codes (541330), similar agencies (DoD), and similar contract types (e.g., CPFF) over comparable durations, while accounting for inflation and the specific technological scope.

What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis, and were alternative solutions considered?

The provided data explicitly states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED' (ct: NOT COMPETED), indicating a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not included in the abbreviated data. Typically, sole-source awards require a formal justification and approval (J&A) process, citing reasons such as unique capabilities, lack of available sources, or urgent and compelling needs. Without access to the J&A document, it's impossible to know if alternative solutions were considered or why they were deemed unsuitable. The absence of competition suggests that the government determined Integrated Concepts & Research Corporation was the only responsible source capable of meeting the requirement, but the rationale behind this determination is not publicly detailed in this dataset.

What are the potential risks associated with the 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) contract type for this long-term R&D project?

The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) contract type carries inherent risks, particularly for long-term Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDTE) projects. The primary risk for the government is cost overrun. Since the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus a fixed fee, there is less financial incentive for the contractor to control expenses compared to fixed-price contracts. If the project scope expands or unforeseen technical challenges arise, costs can escalate significantly. For the contractor, the risk lies in accurately estimating the fixed fee to cover their overhead and profit, especially in R&D where outcomes can be uncertain. Effective government oversight is crucial to manage this risk, ensuring costs are reasonable, allocable, and allowable, and that the fixed fee adequately compensates the contractor for the effort without being excessive.

What is the historical spending pattern for Integrated Concepts & Research Corporation with the Department of Defense, and does this contract represent a significant portion of their federal revenue?

The provided data focuses on a single contract awarded to Integrated Concepts & Research Corporation (ICRC) by the Department of Defense (DoD) totaling $29,658,757.86. This dataset does not offer a comprehensive view of ICRC's historical spending patterns with the DoD or other federal agencies. To assess if this contract represents a significant portion of their federal revenue, one would need access to ICRC's complete contract history, including all awards, modifications, and task orders across all federal agencies over multiple fiscal years. Without this broader context, it's impossible to determine the contract's relative importance to ICRC's overall business portfolio or its place within their historical relationship with the DoD. Further investigation into federal procurement databases would be necessary.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: VSE Corporation (UEI: 049997380)

Address: 6348 WALKER LN, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22310

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

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline