DoD's $37M Nuclear Test Personnel Review contract awarded to Engility LLC shows fair value with 2 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $37,015,382 ($37.0M)

Contractor: Engility LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-12-15

End Date: 2014-11-30

Contract Duration: 2,907 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NUCLEAR TEST PERSONNEL REVIEW (NTPR) SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: RESTON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20190

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $37.0 million to ENGILITY LLC for work described as: NUCLEAR TEST PERSONNEL REVIEW (NTPR) SUPPORT Key points: 1. The contract achieved a reasonable price point given the specialized nature of the services. 2. Competition was present but limited, suggesting potential for better price discovery with more bidders. 3. The contract's duration and cost-plus award fee structure present moderate performance and cost risks. 4. Services provided are critical for maintaining historical records and supporting personnel. 5. This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector for the DoD. 6. The contract was awarded as a definitive contract, indicating a clear scope of work.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $37 million over its period of performance appears reasonable for specialized technical support services. While specific benchmarks for 'Nuclear Test Personnel Review' are scarce, the pricing seems aligned with other complex professional services contracts within the Department of Defense. The cost-plus award fee structure allows for performance incentives, but also necessitates careful oversight to ensure value for money. Compared to similar long-term support contracts, the overall cost per year is within expected ranges.

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. Two bids were received, which suggests a moderate level of competition. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of proposals could have potentially led to more aggressive pricing and a wider range of technical solutions. The agency's decision to proceed with two offers implies that sufficient competition was met to ensure a fair and reasonable price.

Taxpayer Impact: The presence of two bidders indicates that taxpayers benefited from some level of price competition, preventing a sole-source situation. However, more bidders could have potentially driven down costs further, leading to greater savings for taxpayers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel, who rely on accurate historical data for health and benefits. Services delivered include research, analysis, and documentation related to nuclear testing and its effects on personnel. The geographic impact is primarily national, supporting federal agencies and potentially impacting veterans and their families. Workforce implications include the need for specialized researchers, analysts, and technical staff with security clearances.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus award fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
The long duration of the contract (over 8 years) increases the risk of scope creep or changing requirements.
Reliance on a single contractor for such a critical historical review function could pose a risk if contractor performance degrades.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, ensuring a broad search for qualified contractors.
The definitive contract type suggests a well-defined scope, reducing ambiguity.
The presence of two bidders indicates some level of market interest and capability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services sector, specifically focusing on specialized research and analysis. This sector is characterized by a high degree of expertise and often involves government-specific requirements. Comparable spending in this sector for the DoD includes a wide range of support services, from IT to engineering and scientific consulting. The market size for such niche services can be limited to a few highly specialized firms.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses within the provided data. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity capable of handling the full scope of work, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be minimal unless Engility LLC actively engages small business subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and the contracting officer within the Department of Defense. The cost-plus award fee structure necessitates rigorous performance monitoring and financial audits to ensure accountability and prevent improper charges. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific internal oversight details are not publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Department of Energy Nuclear Weapons Programs
Department of Veterans Affairs Health and Benefits Programs
DoD Historical Records and Archiving Services
Nuclear Safety and Environmental Compliance Services

Risk Flags

Cost-Plus Award Fee structure requires diligent oversight.
Long contract duration increases risk of requirement changes.
Limited competition may impact price optimization.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $37.0 million to ENGILITY LLC. NUCLEAR TEST PERSONNEL REVIEW (NTPR) SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENGILITY LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $37.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-12-15. End: 2014-11-30.

What is the historical spending trend for Nuclear Test Personnel Review (NTPR) support services by the Department of Defense?

The provided data reflects a single definitive contract awarded to Engility LLC for NTPR support totaling $37,015,382.38, spanning from December 15, 2006, to November 30, 2014. This represents a significant investment over an approximately 8-year period. Without access to broader contract databases or historical procurement records specifically for NTPR support, it is difficult to establish a comprehensive spending trend. However, this single award indicates a sustained need for these specialized services over a considerable duration. Future spending would likely depend on evolving requirements for historical record maintenance, personnel health studies, and potential litigation support related to nuclear testing.

How does the per-contractor cost for NTPR support compare to similar specialized technical services within the DoD?

Benchmarking the per-contractor cost for NTPR support is challenging due to the highly specialized nature of the services. The total contract value of approximately $37 million over nearly 8 years equates to an average annual spend of roughly $4.6 million. This figure needs to be considered in the context of the specific expertise required, including historical research, scientific analysis, and potentially access to classified information. When compared to other complex professional and technical services within the DoD, such as cybersecurity, advanced engineering, or intelligence analysis, this annual spend appears to be within a reasonable range. However, a direct comparison is difficult without identifying contracts with identical service scopes and complexity.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for specialized services like NTPR support?

Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contracts, like the one awarded to Engility LLC for NTPR support, present specific risks. The primary risk is potential cost overruns, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus an award fee based on performance. If performance targets are not clearly defined or if oversight is insufficient, contractors may incur higher costs than anticipated. The 'award fee' component introduces subjectivity, potentially leading to disputes over performance evaluations. For NTPR support, risks include the contractor potentially prioritizing activities that maximize award fees over the most critical research needs, or inflating costs to ensure higher reimbursement. Robust oversight, clear performance metrics, and regular audits are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure value for taxpayer money.

What is the track record of Engility LLC in providing similar technical and research services to the federal government?

Engility LLC, prior to its acquisition by SAIC in 2019, had a significant track record of providing a wide range of technical, engineering, and IT services to various U.S. federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their portfolio often included complex support services, systems engineering, and program management. While specific details on their performance for the NTPR contract are not detailed here, their general history suggests capability in managing large, complex government contracts. However, as with any large contractor, performance can vary across different contracts and agencies. Post-acquisition, the capabilities and contracts previously held by Engility are now part of SAIC's broader offerings.

How does the competition level (2 bidders) for this contract potentially impact its overall effectiveness and cost efficiency?

A competition level of two bidders for this NTPR support contract suggests a moderate degree of market interest but falls short of robust competition. While it prevented a sole-source scenario, limiting the number of offers may have reduced the pressure on bidders to offer their most competitive pricing and innovative solutions. This could mean that the government may not have achieved the lowest possible price or the most optimal technical approach. The effectiveness of the contract might be influenced by the specific capabilities of the two competing firms; if one had a significant advantage, the competition might have been less impactful. For cost efficiency, taxpayers likely paid more than they might have if there were, for example, four or five bidders vying for the contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: HDTRA105R0007

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Science Applications International Corporation (UEI: 078745061)

Address: 11955 FREEDOM DR STE 2000, 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: $38,869,629

Exercised Options: $38,470,483

Current Obligation: $37,015,382

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline