Transportation contract for engineering services awarded to Advanced Management Technology, Inc. for over $11.9 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,993,840 ($12.0M)

Contractor: Advanced Management Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2006-02-17

End Date: 2009-12-11

Contract Duration: 1,393 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PROGRAM SUPPORT - TASK 003, DTFAWA-06-C-00006, POP - 12 MONTHS

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22209

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $12.0 million to ADVANCED MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: PROGRAM SUPPORT - TASK 003, DTFAWA-06-C-00006, POP - 12 MONTHS Key points: 1. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The duration of the contract is over three years, indicating a significant commitment. 3. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can present cost control challenges. 4. The award was made by the Federal Aviation Administration, a key agency within the Department of Transportation. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to engineering services. 6. The contract was awarded in 2006, providing historical context for current spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $11.9 million over 1393 days (nearly 4 years) suggests an average annual value of around $3 million. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, a direct value-for-money assessment is difficult. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while offering flexibility, can lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently. Benchmarking against similar engineering services contracts within the FAA or DOT would be necessary for a more precise valuation.

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 a bid. The presence of 3 bidders (no) suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific procurement. While full and open competition is generally preferred for maximizing price discovery and achieving best value, the number of bidders can influence the intensity of that competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging lower bids and potentially better service offerings from contractors vying for the award.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the primary beneficiary, receiving engineering services to support its operations. The services delivered are categorized under engineering services, likely contributing to aviation infrastructure, safety, or regulatory functions. The geographic impact is likely national, given the FAA's purview over U.S. airspace and aviation. Workforce implications could include employment for engineers and technical staff within Advanced Management Technology, Inc. and potentially subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type may incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored.
The contract duration of over three years requires sustained oversight to ensure performance and value.
Limited information on specific performance metrics makes it challenging to assess the contractor's effectiveness over the contract's life.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible bidding process.
The contract was awarded to a single entity, suggesting a clear line of accountability for performance.
The contract falls under the Department of Transportation, a major federal agency with significant oversight capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector supports various government functions, including infrastructure development, research, and operational support. The market for engineering services is competitive, with numerous firms capable of providing specialized expertise. The FAA, as a major consumer of such services, represents a significant segment of government spending in this area.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific benefits for the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, Advanced Management Technology, Inc., is likely a mid-to-large-sized business, and its subcontracting practices would determine any indirect impact on small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the contracting officers and program managers within the Federal Aviation Administration. Accountability measures are typically embedded within the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement databases where contract awards are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Federal Aviation Administration Operations
Department of Transportation Engineering Contracts
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Procurement
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
Contract duration of over three years necessitates sustained performance monitoring.
Limited public information on specific deliverables and performance outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $12.0 million to ADVANCED MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC.. PROGRAM SUPPORT - TASK 003, DTFAWA-06-C-00006, POP - 12 MONTHS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ADVANCED MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-02-17. End: 2009-12-11.

What was the specific nature of the engineering services provided under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'Engineering Services' under NAICS code 541330. While the exact nature of the services isn't detailed, typical engineering services for the FAA could encompass areas such as air traffic control system design, airport infrastructure planning and design, aviation safety analysis, environmental engineering related to aviation, or research and development support for new aviation technologies. The 'PROGRAM SUPPORT - TASK 003' designation suggests it was part of a larger program requiring specialized engineering expertise for specific tasks or projects.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type compare to other contract types in terms of cost efficiency for the government?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are generally used when the scope of work is not well-defined or involves a high degree of uncertainty, making fixed-price contracts impractical. In a CPFF contract, the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While this offers flexibility, it can incentivize contractors to incur higher costs, as their profit (the fixed fee) remains constant regardless of the actual costs incurred. This contrasts with fixed-price contracts, where the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns and is incentivized to control expenses to maximize profit. For cost efficiency, fixed-price contracts are often preferred when requirements are clear. CPFF contracts require robust government oversight to manage costs effectively and ensure fair pricing.

What is the typical annual spending for engineering services by the Federal Aviation Administration?

Determining the precise typical annual spending for engineering services by the FAA requires access to historical and current procurement data beyond this single contract. However, the FAA consistently invests billions of dollars annually in modernizing air traffic control systems, improving airport infrastructure, and ensuring aviation safety, much of which relies on engineering services. Contracts for engineering support can range from small, specialized task orders to large, multi-year programs. This $11.9 million contract, spanning nearly four years, represents a moderate investment for a specific program support function within the FAA's broader engineering needs.

What does the number of bidders (3) suggest about the competition for this specific contract?

Having 3 bidders for a 'full and open competition' contract suggests a moderate level of competition. While more bidders generally indicate stronger competition, three offers are sufficient to provide a basis for price comparison and ensure that the government receives proposals from multiple sources. The quality and competitiveness of these three bids would ultimately determine the effectiveness of the competition. A low number of bidders (e.g., 1 or 2) might raise concerns about market capacity or barriers to entry, whereas a higher number typically drives prices down and encourages innovation.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract awarded in 2006 that concluded in 2009?

Contracts awarded over a decade ago carry specific risks related to data relevance and performance assessment. For this 2006-2009 contract, the primary risk is that the performance data and cost structures may not be representative of current market conditions or technological capabilities. Assessing the contractor's track record based on this contract requires understanding if the services were delivered successfully and on time, but the context of 2006 technology and operational needs might differ significantly from today's requirements. Furthermore, evaluating the 'value for money' retrospectively is challenging without detailed performance metrics and comparable data from that specific period.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Tetra Tech, Inc. (UEI: 045224250)

Address: 1515 WILSON BLVD STE 1100, ARLINGTON, VA, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $76,000,000

Exercised Options: $11,993,840

Current Obligation: $11,993,840

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAWA06C00006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline