Science Applications International Corporation awarded $22.5M for engineering and technical support services by the Department of Defense

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,492,579 ($22.5M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-08-08

End Date: 2024-01-25

Contract Duration: 3,822 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS, COMPONENTS, EQUIPMENT SENSOR INTEGRATION AND VALIDATION OF TECHNICAL DATA PACKAGES (TDP), SCIENTIFIC/ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND STUDIES, TEST AND EVALUATION, TECHNICAL DATA, FEASIBILITY STUDIES, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, RAPID DELIVERY/PROTOTYPE, TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH, SYSTEM DESIGN, FIELD ENGINEERING, INTEGRATED LOGISTICS, CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT, FACILITY ENGINEERING, PROGRAM SUPPORT, KNOWLEDGE AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT.

Place of Performance

Location: ANDOVER, ESSEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01810

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.5 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS, COMPONENTS, EQUIPMENT SENSOR INTEGRATION AND VALIDATION OF TECHNICAL DATA PACKAGES (TDP), SCIENTIFIC/ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND STUDIES, TEST AND EVALUATION, TECHNICAL DATA, FEASIBILITY STUDIES, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, RAPID DELIVERY/PR… Key points: 1. Contract provides a broad range of engineering and technical support, including system design, R&D, and logistics. 2. The contract spans over a decade, indicating long-term support needs for complex defense systems. 3. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), which can incentivize cost savings but also carries inherent cost uncertainty. 5. The award was made to a single contractor, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), a major defense contractor. 6. The contract includes multiple delivery orders, suggesting flexibility in tasking and delivery. 7. The geographic scope appears to be national, given the agency and nature of services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $22.5 million over approximately 10 years represents a significant investment in engineering and technical support. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale, long-term defense contracts is challenging without more granular data on the specific services rendered. However, the CPIF contract type suggests an attempt to manage costs through performance incentives, which is a positive sign for value. The duration and breadth of services indicate a potentially good value if the contractor effectively meets the evolving technical requirements of the Department of Defense.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this approach generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. The use of full and open competition is a standard practice for significant federal procurements and aims to ensure the government receives the best possible value.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this contract helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging high-quality service delivery.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from specialized engineering and technical expertise to support its complex systems and operations. Services delivered include system design, research and development, sensor integration, and logistics support, crucial for maintaining military readiness. The contract supports the development and validation of technical data packages, essential for the lifecycle management of defense equipment. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers, scientists, and technical specialists within SAIC and its potential subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly, as the government bears the cost of performance plus an incentive fee.
The long duration of the contract (over 10 years) increases the risk of scope creep or misalignment with evolving technological needs if not actively managed.
Reliance on a single large contractor for such a broad range of critical services could pose a risk if performance issues arise or if the contractor's strategic direction changes.

Positive Signals

The use of full and open competition suggests a robust process to select the most capable and cost-effective provider.
SAIC is a well-established defense contractor with a proven track record, indicating a lower risk of performance failure.
The CPIF contract structure, while carrying risks, also includes incentives for the contractor to perform efficiently and meet objectives.
The broad scope of services allows for flexibility in addressing diverse and evolving defense system needs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader aerospace and defense industry. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by the continuous need for modernization, maintenance, and development of advanced military technologies. Spending in this sector is often characterized by long-term, complex contracts awarded to large, specialized firms like SAIC, reflecting the high barriers to entry and the specialized knowledge required.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration (ss: false, sb: false). While SAIC, as a large prime contractor, may engage small businesses for subcontracting, the primary award was not directed towards small business set-asides. This means the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely through subcontracting opportunities rather than direct prime contracts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. The CPIF contract type necessitates close monitoring of costs and performance against established metrics. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting requirements, though specific details of performance and cost breakdowns may be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Engineering Services
Systems Engineering
Research and Development Contracts
Logistics Support Services
Technical Data Package Development

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep.
CPIF contract type requires diligent cost and performance oversight.
Reliance on a single large contractor necessitates strong performance management.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.5 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS, COMPONENTS, EQUIPMENT SENSOR INTEGRATION AND VALIDATION OF TECHNICAL DATA PACKAGES (TDP), SCIENTIFIC/ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND STUDIES, TEST AND EVALUATION, TECHNICAL DATA, FEASIBILITY STUDIES, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, RAPID DELIVERY/PROTOTYPE, TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH, SYSTEM DESIGN, FIELD ENGINEERING, INTEGRATED LOGISTICS, CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT, FACILITY ENGINEERING, PROGRAM SUPPORT, KNOWLEDGE AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-08-08. End: 2024-01-25.

What is Science Applications International Corporation's (SAIC) track record with similar Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contracts within the Department of Defense?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has a long history of performing complex contracts with the Department of Defense, many of which have utilized various cost-reimbursement structures, including CPIF. SAIC's extensive experience in areas like systems engineering, IT services, and logistics support means they are accustomed to the performance metrics and incentive structures inherent in CPIF agreements. While specific performance data for all past CPIF contracts is not publicly detailed, SAIC's continued success in winning and executing large-scale defense contracts suggests a generally positive track record in managing such agreements. Their ability to adapt to evolving requirements and deliver on complex technical objectives under these contract types is a key factor in their sustained presence in the defense sector. However, like any large contractor, there may be instances of performance challenges or cost variances on specific contracts that are not widely publicized.

How does the total contract value of $22.5 million compare to other engineering and technical support contracts awarded by the DoD in recent years?

The total contract value of $22.5 million over approximately 10 years places this award in the mid-range for large, long-term engineering and technical support contracts within the Department of Defense. Major defense contracts for systems development, integration, and sustainment can often reach hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. However, this $22.5 million figure represents the ceiling or estimated value, and actual spending may vary based on task orders issued. Compared to smaller, project-specific engineering task orders, this is substantial. When contrasted with massive platform development programs, it appears modest. The value is significant enough to indicate a critical need for sustained support but not at the scale of major weapon system acquisition programs, suggesting it likely supports specific systems, components, or research initiatives rather than entire new platforms.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract of this nature?

The primary risk indicator for a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract is the inherent uncertainty in final cost. While the incentive fee structure aims to align contractor and government interests towards cost efficiency and performance targets, the government ultimately bears the cost of performance plus the incentive. If the incentive targets are poorly defined, or if the contractor's cost accounting is not rigorously audited, costs can escalate beyond initial estimates. Another risk is the potential for 'gold plating' or unnecessary work to achieve higher incentive fees, although effective oversight should mitigate this. Furthermore, the long duration of this contract (over 10 years) increases the risk of scope creep, changing requirements, and potential misalignment between the contractor's capabilities and the evolving needs of the DoD if proactive contract management and modifications are not consistently applied.

How does the 'full and open competition' designation impact the potential effectiveness and cost-efficiency of this contract?

The 'full and open competition' designation is a positive indicator for the potential effectiveness and cost-efficiency of this contract. It signifies that the Department of Defense followed a process designed to solicit proposals from the widest possible range of qualified sources. This broad competition typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award, and it allows the government to select the offeror that provides the best overall value, considering both technical merit and cost. For taxpayers, this means that the selected contractor, SAIC, was chosen through a process that aimed to secure the most advantageous terms. While the specific number of bidders isn't detailed, the adherence to full and open competition suggests a robust marketplace was engaged, increasing the likelihood that the government secured competitive pricing and a technically superior solution compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

What are the implications of this contract being awarded to a single entity, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), for over a decade?

Awarding a contract of this scope and duration to a single entity, SAIC, has several implications. Positively, it provides continuity of service and allows for deep institutional knowledge to be built within SAIC regarding the specific systems and requirements. This can lead to greater efficiency and a more integrated support structure. However, it also concentrates risk. If SAIC experiences significant performance issues, financial instability, or strategic shifts, the Department of Defense could face substantial disruption. Furthermore, long-term sole-source or single-award contracts can sometimes reduce competitive pressure over time, potentially leading to less favorable pricing or innovation compared to scenarios with ongoing re-competition or multiple award vehicles. The government must therefore maintain strong oversight and performance management throughout the contract's lifecycle.

Can the 'Engineering Services' (NAICS 541330) classification provide insights into the specific types of work performed under this contract?

Yes, the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 for 'Engineering Services' provides significant insight into the nature of the work performed under this contract. This classification encompasses firms that provide architectural, engineering, and related design services. For a defense contract, this typically includes a wide array of specialized engineering disciplines such as aerospace, mechanical, electrical, civil, and systems engineering. It covers activities like designing systems and components, conducting feasibility studies, providing construction management, performing scientific and technical consulting, and engaging in research and development. Given the contract's description mentioning 'system design, sensor integration, R&D, technical data validation,' the NAICS code confirms that the core of the work involves applying engineering principles to develop, analyze, test, and support defense technologies and systems.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002413R3022

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010 SUNSET HILLS RD, 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: $40,400,536

Exercised Options: $36,397,899

Current Obligation: $22,492,579

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 87

Total Subaward Amount: $838,189,450

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4119

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline