DoD's $26.3M engineering services contract awarded to Amentum Technology, Inc. shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,270,503 ($26.3M)

Contractor: Amentum Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-11-01

End Date: 2013-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,977 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: MATERIALS BASE YEAR

Place of Performance

Location: DAYTON, GREENE County, OHIO, 45433

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.3 million to AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: MATERIALS BASE YEAR Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 2. The contract's duration of nearly 2,000 days indicates a long-term need for engineering services. 3. The use of Time and Materials pricing may present a risk for cost overruns if not closely managed. 4. The contract falls under the Engineering Services NAICS code, a common area for federal procurement. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Air Force, highlighting a specific branch's reliance on these services. 6. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $26.3 million contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data. However, the duration of nearly 2,000 days suggests a substantial investment. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, can lead to higher costs if not meticulously managed and monitored for efficiency. Compared to fixed-price contracts for similar engineering services, T&M can sometimes result in greater overall expenditure for the government, especially for projects with well-defined scopes.

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 offers. The presence of 4 offers suggests a reasonable level of competition for these engineering services. While the exact number of bidders is not a definitive measure of competition quality, having multiple bids generally promotes price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining services at competitive prices, potentially leading to cost savings.

Public Impact

The Department of the Air Force benefits from specialized engineering services to support its operations and infrastructure. The contract likely supports various engineering projects, potentially including design, analysis, and technical support. The geographic impact is centered in Ohio (ST: OH, SN: OHIO), where the contractor is based, suggesting local or regional service delivery. The contract may have implications for the engineering workforce, providing employment opportunities for skilled professionals.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Time and Materials pricing structure can lead to cost overruns if not managed effectively.
  • Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value for money.
  • The long duration of the contract could indicate potential scope creep or evolving requirements.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
  • Multiple offers received, suggesting a healthy level of interest from potential contractors.
  • Contract supports a critical government function (engineering services for the Air Force).

Sector Analysis

Engineering services represent a significant segment of the federal procurement landscape, encompassing a wide range of technical expertise. This contract, valued at approximately $26.3 million over its lifespan, falls within the typical spending range for specialized engineering support. The market for these services is competitive, with numerous firms capable of meeting government requirements. This specific contract likely supports the Air Force's infrastructure or operational needs, fitting within the broader defense sector's demand for technical solutions.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (SS: false, SB: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside requirement. However, the prime contractor, Amentum Technology, Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors, depending on their own subcontracting plans and the nature of the services required. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

  • Defense Engineering Services
  • Air Force Professional Services Contracts
  • Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Vehicles
  • Time and Materials Contracts

Risk Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
  • Long contract duration may lead to scope creep and outdated solutions.
  • Lack of specific performance metrics hinders value assessment.

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-air-force, engineering-services, time-and-materials, full-and-open-competition, delivery-order, ohio, professional-services, large-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.3 million to AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC.. MATERIALS BASE YEAR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC..

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 $26.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-11-01. End: 2013-03-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for engineering services by the Department of the Air Force?

The Department of the Air Force consistently spends billions of dollars annually on engineering services, encompassing a broad spectrum of requirements from infrastructure design and maintenance to advanced research and development support. Historical data indicates a steady demand, driven by the need to maintain and modernize complex military systems and facilities. Spending can fluctuate based on geopolitical events, budget allocations, and specific program requirements. Analyzing trends over the past decade reveals a significant portion allocated to support contracts, including those for specialized engineering expertise, often procured through large IDIQ vehicles that allow for task order awards like the one to Amentum Technology, Inc.

How does the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure compare to fixed-price contracts for similar engineering services in terms of cost-effectiveness for the government?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts offer flexibility, allowing for adjustments in scope and effort as a project evolves. This can be advantageous for services where the exact requirements are not fully defined at the outset. However, T&M contracts carry a higher risk of cost overruns for the government compared to fixed-price contracts. With T&M, the government pays for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred by the contractor, plus a fixed fee or overhead. This necessitates robust government oversight to ensure efficiency and prevent contractor inefficiencies from inflating costs. Fixed-price contracts, conversely, provide greater cost certainty for the government, as the contractor assumes more risk for cost overruns. For well-defined engineering projects, fixed-price contracts are often considered more cost-effective in the long run, provided the scope is accurately estimated.

What is Amentum Technology, Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Amentum Technology, Inc. (and its predecessor entities) has a substantial history of performing federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. They are known for providing a wide range of services, including engineering, logistics, environmental, and facility management. A review of federal procurement databases would reveal numerous awards and contract vehicles held by Amentum. While generally considered a capable contractor, like any large entity with extensive contract history, there may be instances of performance issues or contract disputes. A thorough assessment would involve examining past performance evaluations, any significant contract modifications, and the nature of disputes or claims filed on their awards.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract duration of nearly 2,000 days?

A contract duration of nearly 2,000 days (approximately 5.4 years) presents several potential risks. Firstly, it increases the likelihood of scope creep, where project requirements may evolve significantly over the extended period, potentially leading to cost increases if not managed through formal contract modifications. Secondly, maintaining consistent oversight and engagement from the government can become challenging over such a long timeframe, potentially allowing inefficiencies to develop. Thirdly, the technology or methodologies used might become outdated by the end of the contract period, requiring costly updates or replacements. Finally, long-term contracts can sometimes reduce flexibility for the government to adapt to changing needs or to leverage new, potentially more cost-effective solutions that emerge during the contract's life.

How does the 'Delivery Order' award type impact the overall contract structure and government oversight?

The award of a 'Delivery Order' typically signifies that this contract is a task order issued under a larger, pre-existing Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar type of multiple-award contract. This structure allows the government to procure services or supplies incrementally as needed, rather than awarding a single, large contract upfront. For oversight, it means that while the initial IDIQ vehicle underwent a competitive process, each individual delivery order may have its own specific requirements, pricing, and performance standards. The government must ensure that each order is within the scope and terms of the parent IDIQ contract and that fair and reasonable pricing is established for each order. This approach provides flexibility but requires diligent management of each individual order.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT)PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc (UEI: 074103508)

Address: 600 WILLIAM NORTHERN BLVD, TULLAHOMA, TN, 37388

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $27,463,398

Exercised Options: $27,463,398

Current Obligation: $26,270,503

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0111K

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline

Start Date: 2007-11-01

Current End Date: 2013-03-31

Potential End Date: 2013-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2016-07-29

More Contracts from Amentum Technology, Inc.

View all Amentum Technology, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending