DoD's $38M Engineering Services Contract Awarded to Johns Hopkins APL for Contractor Support
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $38,061,312 ($38.1M)
Contractor: THE Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2022-07-30
End Date: 2023-07-29
Contract Duration: 364 days
Daily Burn Rate: $104.6K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES 30JUL2022-29JUL2023
Place of Performance
Location: LAUREL, HOWARD County, MARYLAND, 20723
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $38.1 million to THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY APPLIED PHYSICS LABORATORY LLC for work described as: CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES 30JUL2022-29JUL2023 Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a cost-plus-fixed-fee basis, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential price discovery and value for money. 3. The duration of the contract is one year, suggesting a need for ongoing support in engineering services. 4. The awardee, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC, is a well-established entity in research and development. 5. The contract falls under Engineering Services, a broad category that requires detailed understanding of specific needs. 6. The geographic location of the contractor is Maryland, which may have implications for local economic impact.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this $38 million contract is challenging without specific details on the engineering services rendered. However, cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts inherently carry a risk of exceeding initial estimates if the scope of work expands or unforeseen costs arise. Comparing this to similar contracts for specialized engineering support would require access to a broader dataset of comparable services and their pricing structures. The fixed fee component provides some cost control, but the variable cost component necessitates close monitoring.
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 approach is typically used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary information, or when urgency precludes a competitive process. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price reductions and innovation that can arise from a bidding process, potentially leading to a higher cost for the services.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these services due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without alternative offers, it is difficult to ascertain if the negotiated price represents the best possible value.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary of this contract is the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Air Force, which receives specialized contractor support. The services delivered are engineering services, crucial for the development, maintenance, or enhancement of defense systems and technologies. The geographic impact is primarily centered around the contractor's location in Maryland, potentially benefiting the local economy through employment and related spending. The contract supports a workforce skilled in specialized engineering fields, contributing to the national capacity in defense-related R&D and technical services.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure requires diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns.
- The specific nature of 'Contractor Support Services' is broad and requires detailed understanding to assess true value.
Positive Signals
- Awardee is a reputable institution (Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC) with a strong track record in research and development.
- The contract addresses a specific need for engineering services within the Department of Defense.
- The fixed fee component provides a degree of cost certainty for the contractor's effort.
Sector Analysis
The engineering services sector is a critical component of the broader defense industrial base, providing essential expertise for complex technological development and sustainment. This contract, valued at approximately $38 million, falls within the realm of specialized technical support. Comparable spending in this sector can vary widely depending on the specific engineering discipline and the scale of the project. The market for defense engineering services is often characterized by a mix of large, established firms and specialized niche providers.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'ss' being false. Furthermore, there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary focus of this award was on the unique capabilities of the prime contractor, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC. The absence of small business participation could limit opportunities for smaller firms to engage in this specific defense engineering effort.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. As a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, rigorous financial oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures against the cost ceiling and ensure the fixed fee is earned appropriately. Transparency regarding the specific tasks performed and the justification for costs incurred would be key accountability measures. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Research and Development Contracts
- Air Force Engineering and Technical Services
- Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contracts
- Sole-Source Defense Procurements
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure carries inherent cost overrun risk.
- Lack of detailed service description hinders value assessment.
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-air-force, engineering-services, contractor-support-services, johns-hopkins-university-applied-physics-laboratory-llc, cost-plus-fixed-fee, sole-source, delivery-order, maryland, research-and-development, technical-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $38.1 million to THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY APPLIED PHYSICS LABORATORY LLC. CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES 30JUL2022-29JUL2023
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY APPLIED PHYSICS LABORATORY LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $38.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2022-07-30. End: 2023-07-29.
What specific engineering services are being provided under this contract, and how do they align with the Department of the Air Force's strategic objectives?
The provided data indicates the contract is for 'CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES' under the 'Engineering Services' NAICS code (541330). However, the specific nature of these services is not detailed. Typically, engineering services in this context could encompass a wide range of activities, including systems engineering, research and development support, technical analysis, design, testing, and integration for various Air Force platforms or programs. To understand their alignment with strategic objectives, one would need to examine the Statement of Work (SOW) associated with the contract. This would reveal whether the support is for current operational needs, future technology development, modernization efforts, or specific weapon system sustainment, all of which tie into broader Air Force goals such as maintaining air superiority, developing next-generation capabilities, or ensuring readiness.
What is the historical spending pattern for similar engineering services contracts awarded by the Department of the Air Force to Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC?
Analyzing historical spending requires access to a comprehensive database of federal contracts. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC (JHUAPL) is a significant recipient of federal funding, particularly from the Department of Defense, due to its role as a University Affiliated Research Center (UARC). Past awards to JHUAPL for engineering and related support services have often been substantial, reflecting its specialized expertise. Without specific historical data for this exact type of 'Contractor Support Services,' it's difficult to provide precise figures. However, JHUAPL consistently ranks among the top contractors for the DoD, with annual awards often in the hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, covering a broad spectrum of research, development, and engineering efforts. This $38 million award appears to be a component of that larger engagement.
Given the sole-source nature of this award, what justification did the Department of the Air Force provide for not competing this requirement?
Sole-source awards are typically justified under specific exceptions to full and open competition, as outlined in federal acquisition regulations (e.g., FAR Part 6). Common justifications include that only one responsible source exists with the unique capability or specialized knowledge required, or that the agency is a University Affiliated Research Center (UARC) like JHUAPL, which often have specific agreements allowing for non-competitive awards for certain types of research and development. Another potential justification could be urgency, where a delay in competition would cause unacceptable delays in meeting the agency's needs. The Department of the Air Force would have issued a Justification and Approval (J&A) document detailing the specific rationale for this sole-source award, which is typically made public, although its accessibility can vary.
How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract type potentially impact the overall cost to the government compared to other contract types like firm-fixed-price (FFP)?
The Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) contract type is used when the extent or nature of the work cannot be defined well enough to permit pricing on a firm-fixed-price basis, but provides less cost risk to the contractor than other cost-reimbursement types. The government agrees to pay the contractor's actual allowable costs plus a fixed amount of profit (the fee). This structure shifts significant cost risk to the government, as the final price is not known upfront and depends on the contractor's actual costs. In contrast, a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract establishes a price that is not subject to adjustment based on the contractor's cost experience. While FFP contracts offer the government the greatest cost certainty, they are best suited for well-defined requirements. For complex, R&D-intensive, or evolving requirements like specialized engineering support, CPFF might be deemed necessary, but it necessitates robust government oversight to manage costs effectively and ensure the fixed fee remains appropriate for the effort performed.
What are the potential risks associated with awarding a $38 million contract on a sole-source basis to a single entity for engineering services?
The primary risk of a sole-source award, especially for a contract of this magnitude ($38 million), is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive pressure. Without competing offers, the government may not achieve the best possible price or terms. There's also a risk that the chosen contractor, while capable, might not be the most innovative or efficient provider available in the market. Furthermore, sole-source awards can sometimes indicate a lack of strategic sourcing or market research by the agency, potentially missing opportunities to foster competition or develop alternative sources. For the government, this means a higher likelihood of paying more than necessary and potentially receiving less value than could be achieved through a competitive process. It also raises concerns about fairness and equal opportunity for other capable contractors.
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: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 11100 JOHNS HOPKINS RD, LAUREL, MD, 20723
Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Limited Liability Corporation, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Private), Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $38,061,312
Exercised Options: $38,061,312
Current Obligation: $38,061,312
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 10
Total Subaward Amount: $698,831
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: FA820421D0001
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2022-07-30
Current End Date: 2023-07-29
Potential End Date: 2023-07-29 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2024-09-16
More Contracts from THE Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC
- Dragonfly Extended Phase B Mission Under 80msfc20d0004 Aerospace Research, Development and Engineering Support (ardes) II — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Aerospace Research, Design, and Development Tasks for Nasa — $1.1B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Solar Probe Plus (SPP) Phase a Activities the Contractor Shall Perform the Work That IS Designated in Task Orders Issued by the Contracting Officer. the Overall Scope of Work to BE Performed Will Support ALL of Nasa's Mission Directorates. These Efforts CAN BE Characterized AS Aerospace Research, Development, and Engineering Support (ardes). the General Nature of the Tasks to BE Developed Will BE to Conduct Supporting Research and Advanced Technology Development Designed to Make Contributions to Space Science and Space Exploration and Assist Nasa in the Formulation and Execution of ITS Programs by Providing Nasa With Technical Advice, Studies, and Reports of Investigations. Efforts Undertaken by the Contractor, in the Performance of the Assigned Tasks, Which Include Technology Transfer, Partnering and Commercialization Activities, Shall Seek to Enhance the Value and Contribution of Technology to the Nation S Technological Competitiveness, Prosperity, Quality of Life, and Other National Priorities. Individual Task Orders Will Fall Within ONE of TWO Broad Categories: 1) Essential Research Capability of Space Systems Engineering, and Related Work in the Supporting Essential Research Capabilities of Systems Test and Evaluation, Information Technology, and Simulation, Modeling and Operations Analysis. Task Orders Within the Category of Essential Research Capabilities ARE Intended to Preserve the Nation S Capabilities to Perform Robotic Space Missions Over the Full Mission Life Cycle From Concept Formulation Through Mission Operations and Data Analysis. Nasa IS Contracting for Support in Several KEY Research, Engineering and Development Competencies That ARE Fundamental to the Performance of These Missions. 2) Other Aerospace Research, Development, and Engineering Support. Task Orders Within the Category of Other Aerospace Research, Development and Engineering Support ARE Intended to Include a Broad Base of Scientific and Technical Capabilities Relevant to Nasa Program Responsibilities and Assignments. Regardless of Category, Task Orders MAY BE Issued Related to Autonomous Deep-Space and Earth-Orbiting Spacecraft or Major Subsystems, Experiments, Instruments or Other Devices That MAY BE Carried AS Payloads on the Space Shuttle or on Other Spacecraft. Task Assignments Will Explicitly Describe a Broad Range of Hardware, Software, Systems Engineering, Scientific Analysis, and Management Efforts Including Program and Project Management and Administration — $894.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- SUN Earth Connection Living With a Star Program Letter Contract — $522.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Interstellar Mapping and Acceleration Probe (imap) Phase CD — $400.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all THE Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory LLC federal contracts →
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)