DoD's $28M TBMCS support contract awarded to Amentum Technology, Inc. for engineering services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,075,317 ($28.1M)

Contractor: Amentum Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-06-29

End Date: 2014-10-03

Contract Duration: 826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $34.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: IT

Official Description: AOC/TBMCS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: LINCOLN, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01773

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $28.1 million to AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: AOC/TBMCS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in critical mission support systems. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding process for this service. 3. Performance period indicates a medium-term engagement for ongoing support. 4. The contract type (Time and Materials) allows for flexibility but requires careful cost management. 5. Engineering services are essential for maintaining complex defense systems. 6. The award was made under the Department of the Air Force, a major defense spender.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $28 million over its duration appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized engineering support of complex defense systems. Benchmarking against similar contracts for mission support systems is challenging without more specific service details. However, the duration of the contract (over two years) and the nature of the services suggest a moderate level of investment. The Time and Materials pricing structure necessitates close monitoring to ensure value for money, as costs can escalate if not managed effectively.

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 bids. The presence of multiple bidders, though not explicitly stated in the provided data, is generally expected in such a competitive environment. This level of competition is intended to drive down prices and ensure the government receives the best value. The specific number of bids received would provide further insight into the intensity of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a market where contractors are incentivized to offer competitive pricing and high-quality services to win awards.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force and its operational units relying on the TBMCS system. Services delivered include direct mission support, crucial for maintaining operational readiness. The geographic impact is likely focused on Air Force installations where TBMCS is deployed. Workforce implications include the need for specialized engineering and technical personnel to fulfill the contract.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense-related IT and mission systems. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by the continuous need to maintain, upgrade, and operate complex military platforms and systems. Spending in this area is often characterized by long-term contracts and specialized expertise requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other contracts for similar system support within the Department of Defense.

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 arising from a small business set-aside. The primary focus of this contract is likely on large, specialized engineering firms capable of meeting the complex requirements of the TBMCS system.

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 defined in the contract's statement of work and performance standards. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific operational details may be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

department-of-defense, department-of-the-air-force, engineering-services, time-and-materials, full-and-open-competition, mission-support, command-and-control, it-services, defense-contract, amentum-technology-inc

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $28.1 million to AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC.. AOC/TBMCS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT

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 $28.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-06-29. End: 2014-10-03.

What is the historical spending trend for AOC/TBMCS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT contracts awarded by the Department of Defense?

Analyzing historical spending trends for AOC/TBMCS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT requires access to comprehensive contract databases. Based on the provided data, this specific contract was awarded in 2012 and ended in 2014, totaling approximately $28 million. To understand broader trends, one would need to examine awards for similar services over multiple fiscal years, looking for patterns in contract values, durations, and awarded contractors. Factors influencing these trends include evolving military requirements, technological advancements in mission support systems, and budgetary allocations within the Department of Defense. A significant increase or decrease in spending over time could indicate shifts in strategic priorities or the effectiveness of current support models.

How does Amentum Technology, Inc.'s performance on this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar defense engineering services?

Evaluating Amentum Technology, Inc.'s performance on this specific contract against industry benchmarks requires access to performance metrics, quality assurance reports, and potentially past performance evaluations that are not publicly available in the provided data. Typically, such comparisons would involve assessing factors like on-time delivery, adherence to technical specifications, cost control (especially relevant for Time and Materials contracts), and customer satisfaction. Industry benchmarks for defense engineering services are often derived from aggregated performance data across numerous contracts and contractors. Without specific performance data for this AOC/TBMCS contract, a direct comparison is not feasible. However, Amentum's continued success in securing defense contracts suggests a generally positive track record.

What are the key risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for direct mission support, and how were they mitigated?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts, like the one awarded for AOC/TBMCS DIRECT MISSION SUPPORT, carry inherent risks, primarily the potential for cost overruns if not managed diligently. The contractor is reimbursed for direct labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials. This structure can incentivize longer task durations or less efficient work if oversight is weak. Key risks include scope creep, where the work expands beyond the original intent without adequate change control, and inflated labor rates or material costs. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust government oversight, including detailed monitoring of labor hours, verification of material costs, and strict adherence to a defined scope of work. Establishing clear milestones, requiring regular progress reports, and implementing a strong change management process are crucial for controlling costs and ensuring value under a T&M contract.

What is the strategic importance of the TBMCS system, and how does this contract contribute to its operational effectiveness?

The Theater Battle Management Core System (TBMCS) is a critical component of the U.S. Air Force's command and control (C2) infrastructure, playing a vital role in managing air operations across various theaters. It integrates information from multiple sources to provide commanders with a comprehensive operational picture, enabling effective planning, execution, and monitoring of air missions. Direct mission support, as provided under this contract, ensures the TBMCS system remains operational, updated, and capable of supporting real-time decision-making. This includes essential maintenance, software updates, troubleshooting, and potentially system enhancements. The contract's contribution is therefore directly linked to maintaining the C2 capabilities necessary for air superiority and mission success, underpinning the Air Force's ability to project power globally.

How does the $28 million contract value compare to the total lifecycle cost of the TBMCS system or similar C2 systems?

The $28 million contract value represents a specific segment of funding allocated for direct mission support over a defined period (approximately two years). To contextualize this against the total lifecycle cost of the TBMCS system or similar Command and Control (C2) systems, a broader analysis is needed. Lifecycle costs encompass research and development, procurement, sustainment (including maintenance, upgrades, and support like this contract), and eventual disposal. Major C2 systems often have lifecycle costs running into hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars over decades. Therefore, this $28 million contract, while substantial for a single support award, is likely a fraction of the overall investment in the TBMCS system throughout its operational life. It highlights the ongoing costs associated with sustaining complex defense technology.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICESARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

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, 04

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,975,917

Exercised Options: $28,975,917

Current Obligation: $28,075,317

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0111K

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline

Start Date: 2012-06-29

Current End Date: 2014-10-03

Potential End Date: 2014-10-03 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2014-10-01

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