Naval Surface Warfare Center awarded $83.89M for engineering services, with a significant portion for Gray Hawk Systems Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,464,426 ($34.5M)

Contractor: Mantech Gray Hawk Systems, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-08-01

End Date: 2014-02-01

Contract Duration: 3,106 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200511!059884!1700!N00174!INDIAN HEAD DIVISION NAVAL SURFA!N0017804D4058 !A!N! !Y!FG01 ! !20050801!20060731!838918183!838918183!838918183!N!GRAY HAWK SYSTEMS INC !4501 FORD AVE STE 1320 !ALEXANDRIA !VA!22302!01000!510!51!ALEXANDRIA !ALEXANDRIA (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000000100000!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20090331!B! ! !A! !A!N!U!2!021!B! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! !1700!N00174!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22302

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.5 million to MANTECH GRAY HAWK SYSTEMS, INC. for work described as: 200511!059884!1700!N00174!INDIAN HEAD DIVISION NAVAL SURFA!N0017804D4058 !A!N! !Y!FG01 ! !20050801!20060731!838918183!838918183!838918183!N!GRAY HAWK SYSTEMS INC !4501 FORD AVE STE 1320 !ALEXANDRIA !VA!22302!01000!510!51!ALEXANDRIA !ALEX… Key points: 1. Contract value of $83.89M over its lifecycle indicates substantial investment in engineering and technical services. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust market for these services. 3. Performance period spanning from 2005 to 2014 suggests a long-term need and established relationship. 4. The primary contractor, Gray Hawk Systems Inc., received a significant portion of the award, highlighting their role. 5. The Public Law 110-181 designation may indicate specific federal acquisition regulations or reporting requirements. 6. The contract's focus on engineering services aligns with broader defense sector needs for technical expertise.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award of $83.89 million for engineering services appears reasonable given the contract duration of over 10 years. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering contracts within the Department of Defense is necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. However, the initial delivery order value of $83.89 million suggests a significant commitment to the awarded services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 21 bids suggests a competitive environment, which typically drives better pricing and service offerings for the government. The level of competition is a positive indicator for price discovery and ensuring taxpayer funds are used efficiently.

Taxpayer Impact: The extensive competition for this contract suggests that taxpayers benefited from a range of proposals, likely leading to more cost-effective solutions and a broader pool of qualified providers.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from specialized engineering and technical services crucial for naval operations. The contract supports the Indian Head Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, a key research and development facility. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers and technical specialists within the contractor's organization. Geographic impact is concentrated in Virginia, where the contractor is located, and potentially at naval facilities where services are rendered.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns in Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts if not managed diligently.
Long contract duration could lead to scope creep or evolving requirements not fully captured in initial pricing.
Dependence on a single primary contractor for a significant portion of services may pose a risk if performance falters.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a healthy market and potential for competitive pricing.
The contract's long duration suggests a stable and ongoing need for the services provided.
The existence of multiple bids (21) points to a robust vendor landscape.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a critical component of the defense industrial base. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by the continuous need for research, development, testing, and evaluation of military systems. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense to various warfare centers and agencies.

Small Business Impact

There is no explicit indication of small business set-asides for this contract, as it was awarded under full and open competition. However, the prime contractor may engage small businesses for subcontracting opportunities to fulfill specific requirements. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the extent of subcontracting participation and the nature of the services required.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be embedded within the contract terms, including performance metrics and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed performance reviews are often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Surface Warfare Center Contracts
Engineering and Technical Services Contracts
Department of Defense Research and Development
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Full and Open Competition Awards

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts require diligent oversight to manage costs.
Dependence on a single prime contractor for a large portion of the award value.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.5 million to MANTECH GRAY HAWK SYSTEMS, INC.. 200511!059884!1700!N00174!INDIAN HEAD DIVISION NAVAL SURFA!N0017804D4058 !A!N! !Y!FG01 ! !20050801!20060731!838918183!838918183!838918183!N!GRAY HAWK SYSTEMS INC !4501 FORD AVE STE 1320 !ALEXANDRIA !VA!22302!01000!510!51!ALEXANDRIA !ALEXANDRIA (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000000100000!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!200

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MANTECH GRAY HAWK SYSTEMS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $34.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-08-01. End: 2014-02-01.

What was the specific nature of the engineering and technical services provided under this contract?

The contract primarily covered engineering and technical services, with a specific designation of 'ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES'. While the data does not detail the exact scope, such services typically encompass areas like systems engineering, design, analysis, testing, integration, and lifecycle support for naval systems and platforms. Given the Indian Head Division's focus, this could involve ordnance, explosives, propulsion, or related technologies. The services were likely critical for the research, development, and sustainment of naval capabilities.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure compare to other contract types for similar services?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common in research and development or when the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, allowing for flexibility. Unlike fixed-price contracts, CPFF reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This structure shifts some cost risk to the government compared to firm-fixed-price contracts but provides more certainty than cost-plus-incentive-fee or cost-plus-award-fee contracts. For engineering services where innovation or evolving requirements are expected, CPFF can be appropriate, but it necessitates robust government oversight to control costs and ensure value.

What is the significance of the 'Public Law 110-181' designation associated with this contract?

The designation 'Public Law 110-181' refers to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. Contracts or procurements referencing this law often relate to specific provisions or requirements mandated by that act. These could include requirements for promoting competition, supporting small businesses, enhancing acquisition efficiency, or addressing specific defense policy goals. Without further context specific to this contract's award action, it's difficult to pinpoint the exact implication, but it signifies adherence to a particular legislative directive within defense procurement.

What does the duration of the contract (2005-2014) imply about the stability and nature of the services required?

A contract duration spanning nearly a decade (2005-2014) strongly suggests that the engineering and technical services procured were for long-term, stable requirements. This extended period implies a consistent need for specialized expertise, potentially related to the sustainment of existing naval systems, ongoing research and development projects, or long-lead-time acquisition programs. Such longevity often indicates a successful working relationship between the government and the contractor, as well as a predictable demand within the specific sector of naval warfare addressed by the Indian Head Division.

How did the number of bidders (21) influence the final pricing and terms of the contract?

With 21 bidders participating in the full and open competition, the government likely benefited from a highly competitive environment. A larger number of bids generally leads to more aggressive pricing as contractors strive to win the award. It also increases the likelihood that the government receives proposals that closely align with its requirements and offer innovative solutions. The extensive competition suggests that the government had a strong position to negotiate favorable terms and pricing, maximizing the value derived from taxpayer funds for these critical engineering services.

What is the typical role of a contractor like Gray Hawk Systems Inc. in supporting naval surface warfare centers?

Contractors like Gray Hawk Systems Inc. play a vital role in supporting naval surface warfare centers by providing specialized technical and engineering expertise that may not be available in-house or is needed for surge capacity. This can include support for research and development, systems engineering, testing and evaluation, program management, and lifecycle sustainment of naval platforms and weapon systems. Their involvement allows warfare centers to focus on core competencies and strategic objectives while leveraging external capabilities for specific project needs, ensuring the advancement and readiness of naval technology.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Mantech International Corporation

Address: 4501 FORD AVE, STE 1320, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22302

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4058

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline