DoD's $236M ANGELFIRE tech assessment with Leidos awarded via sole-source contract
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $236,483,296 ($236.5M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2010-09-15
End Date: 2014-07-31
Contract Duration: 1,415 days
Daily Burn Rate: $167.1K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: TAS 21 2093 OCONUS ANGELFIRE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Place of Performance
Location: RESTON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20190
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $236.5 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: TAS 21 2093 OCONUS ANGELFIRE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a single vendor, raising questions about competitive pricing. 2. Significant investment in R&D for advanced technologies, potentially driving innovation. 3. Long contract duration suggests a complex and ongoing research effort. 4. Performance risk may be elevated due to the sole-source nature and R&D focus. 5. Sector positioning within advanced physical and engineering sciences research. 6. Limited transparency on specific deliverables and outcomes due to R&D classification.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The contract's value of $236.5 million over approximately four years for a technology assessment is substantial. Without comparable sole-source R&D contracts for similar assessments, it's difficult to benchmark value for money. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure can incentivize cost overruns if not tightly managed, and the lack of competition means taxpayers did not benefit from potential price reductions through bidding.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Leidos, Inc., was solicited. This approach bypasses the standard competitive bidding process, which typically yields multiple proposals and allows for price negotiation. The justification for a sole-source award often relates to unique capabilities or proprietary technology, but it inherently limits price discovery and potentially increases costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be getting the best possible price, as there was no opportunity for multiple companies to compete and offer lower bids. This can lead to higher overall spending for similar research and development efforts.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, seeking to advance its technological capabilities. Services delivered include research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences. Geographic impact is likely concentrated within the R&D facilities of the contractor and relevant DoD research centers. Workforce implications include highly skilled scientists, engineers, and researchers employed by Leidos.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed stringently.
- Long contract duration (1415 days) increases exposure to potential scope creep or changing technological landscapes.
- R&D focus inherently carries a higher risk of not achieving desired outcomes compared to procurement of existing technologies.
Positive Signals
- Award to a known entity (Leidos) suggests a level of trust in their capabilities for specialized R&D.
- Focus on advanced technology assessment aligns with national security objectives.
- The contract aims to explore and develop cutting-edge solutions for defense applications.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences (NAICS 541712). This is a critical area for defense modernization, involving significant investment in innovation. The market for defense R&D is characterized by specialized firms, long development cycles, and often, government-funded, non-competitive awards due to the sensitive or unique nature of the research. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the proprietary nature of much defense R&D.
Small Business Impact
The contract data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb fields) was false, and there is no mention of small business set-asides. This suggests that the primary contractor, Leidos, Inc., is a large business, and there is no explicit requirement for subcontracting to small businesses within the provided data. This contract does not appear to directly benefit the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure necessitates rigorous financial oversight to control costs. Transparency on specific R&D activities and outcomes may be limited due to national security or proprietary concerns, impacting public accountability.
Related Government Programs
- Advanced Technology Development Programs
- Department of Defense Research and Development
- Leidos Inc. Contracts
- Sole-Source Defense Contracts
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award may lead to higher costs.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type carries inherent cost control risks.
- Long contract duration increases exposure to changing requirements and obsolescence.
- R&D projects have a higher risk of technical failure compared to procurement.
- Lack of competition limits transparency in pricing.
Tags
department-of-defense, research-and-development, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee, leidos-inc, technology-assessment, physical-sciences, engineering-sciences, definitive-contract, large-business, defense-contract-management-agency
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $236.5 million to LEIDOS, INC.. TAS 21 2093 OCONUS ANGELFIRE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $236.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2010-09-15. End: 2014-07-31.
What specific technologies or research areas did the ANGELFIRE program focus on, and what were the key objectives?
The provided data does not specify the exact technologies or research areas within the ANGELFIRE program. However, the NAICS code 541712 indicates 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology).' Given the 'ANGELFIRE' codename and its award by the Department of Defense, it is highly probable that the research focused on advanced defense applications, potentially including areas like sensor technology, electronic warfare, cyber capabilities, or materials science relevant to military operations. The key objectives would likely revolve around assessing the feasibility, performance, and potential integration of these technologies into existing or future defense systems, aiming to provide a technological advantage.
What is Leidos, Inc.'s track record with sole-source R&D contracts for the Department of Defense?
Leidos, Inc. is a major government contractor with a significant history of performing R&D services for the Department of Defense across various domains. While specific data on their sole-source R&D contract volume isn't provided here, their extensive experience suggests they are frequently chosen for complex, specialized projects where their unique expertise or existing technological base is deemed essential. Sole-source awards to large, established contractors like Leidos are not uncommon in defense R&D, particularly when the research involves proprietary information, highly specialized knowledge, or requires continuity with prior development efforts. Analyzing Leidos' broader contract portfolio would reveal the extent to which they are awarded sole-source R&D, but their general profile indicates a strong capability in this area.
How does the $236.5 million cost compare to similar sole-source R&D technology assessments for the DoD?
Benchmarking the $236.5 million cost of this sole-source R&D contract against similar DoD technology assessments is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of comparable sole-source awards. Sole-source R&D contracts are inherently difficult to compare due to the unique nature of the research, the specific technologies involved, and the proprietary aspects that often justify the non-competitive award. However, for context, large-scale R&D efforts within the defense sector can easily run into hundreds of millions of dollars over several years. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure means the final cost is influenced by actual expenses plus a negotiated fee, making direct price comparisons with fixed-price contracts or competitively bid projects less meaningful. The absence of competition means there's no direct market price discovery to assess if this represents a 'good' or 'bad' deal in absolute terms.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee R&D contract of this magnitude and duration?
This contract carries several inherent risks. Firstly, the sole-source nature eliminates competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher costs than if the contract were competed. Secondly, the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) structure, while providing flexibility for R&D, can incentivize the contractor to incur costs to increase the fixed fee (if the fee is a percentage of costs) or simply not manage costs as tightly as they might under a fixed-price contract. The long duration (1415 days, nearly 4 years) increases the risk of scope creep, technological obsolescence during the project, or shifts in government priorities. Furthermore, R&D projects inherently carry a risk of not achieving their intended technical objectives, regardless of cost management. Effective oversight by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) is crucial to mitigate these risks.
What does the contract's end date of July 31, 2014, imply about the program's current status and outcomes?
The contract's end date of July 31, 2014, indicates that this specific award has long since concluded. This implies that the ANGELFIRE technology assessment has been completed, and its findings and outcomes should be available within the Department of Defense. The implications for the program's current status are that the DoD has likely moved past this assessment phase. Any technologies or insights gained would have been incorporated into subsequent development, procurement, or operational decisions. The lack of ongoing activity under this specific contract suggests that either the objectives were met, the project was terminated, or the subsequent phases have been awarded under different contract vehicles. Further investigation would be needed to understand the ultimate impact and utilization of the research conducted.
How does this contract fit into the broader landscape of defense R&D spending, particularly in the physical and engineering sciences?
This $236.5 million contract represents a significant, albeit specific, investment within the broader Department of Defense R&D budget, particularly in the physical and engineering sciences. Defense R&D spending is a critical component of maintaining technological superiority, encompassing a wide array of research from basic science to applied engineering and advanced prototyping. Contracts like ANGELFIRE, focused on technology assessment, are crucial for identifying and evaluating emerging capabilities that could address future threats or operational needs. While this single contract is a fraction of the total DoD R&D budget (which runs into tens of billions annually), it highlights the government's commitment to exploring cutting-edge solutions in specialized scientific and engineering fields. Its sole-source nature suggests a focus on unique or proprietary advancements.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
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: Leidos Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 611641312)
Address: 11951 FREEDOM DR, 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: $237,453,818
Exercised Options: $237,453,818
Current Obligation: $236,483,296
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 246
Total Subaward Amount: $115,506,893
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2010-09-15
Current End Date: 2014-07-31
Potential End Date: 2014-07-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-09-20
More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.
- Science Operation and Maintenance Support for the United States Antarctic Program — $3.1B (National Science Foundation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Department of Transportation)
- THE Facilities Development and Operations Contract(fdoc) Specifies Technical, Managerial, and Adminstrative Work Needed to Ensure the Availablitity, Integrity, and Reliability of Missionoperations Facilites Supporting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa) Human Space Flight (HSF) Programs Requiring Mission Operations Support. the Objective of This Contract IS to Consolidate Efforts Across the Facilities Covered Under Fodoc in Order to Maximize Synergy for Hardware and Software Development, Modification, Sustaining. Maintenance, Reconfiguration, and Operations for the Purpose of Reducing Cost Without Compromising Facility Functionality and Performance. Nasa Will Collaborate With the Contractor on Developing Procedural and Technical Innovations That Improve Quality, Ensure Customer Satisfaction and Reduce Cost. Mission Operations Facilities Currently Support the Space Shuttle Programand the International Space Station Progra, Including International Partner and Commmercial Visiting Vehicles. Mission Operations Facilities Supporting the Cnstellation Program(cxp) ARE Continuously Under Development in Concert With CXP Formulation and Implementation. Fdoc Applies to the Facilities of These Three Programs, and ANY Other HSF Program Requiring Mission Operations Facility Support. in Addition, Future Mission Operations Facilities and Capabilities ARE Within the Technical Scope of This SOW, and Fdoc Worlk Associated With These Facilities Will BE Enabled Through Idiq — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Airspace System (NAS) Implementation Support Contract (nisc). Provides Engineering and Technical Support Services to FAA Organizations Responsible for NAS Transformation, Integration and Implementation in the Areas of Implementation and Integration Planning, Transition Planning, Engineering Support, Environmental Support, Automation Support and Other Engineering and Technical Disciplines AS Required. TAS::69 8107::TAS — $1.1B (Department of Transportation)
- Itssc Task Order for Systems — $1.1B (Social Security Administration)
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)