DHS awards $170M non-competitive contract to Leidos for Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $17,041,640 ($17.0M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Start Date: 2006-09-16
End Date: 2011-01-31
Contract Duration: 1,598 days
Daily Burn Rate: $10.7K/day
Competition Type: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: CAARS
Place of Performance
Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92121
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Homeland Security obligated $17.0 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: CAARS Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a single vendor, Leidos, Inc., indicating a lack of competition. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which can lead to higher costs if not managed effectively. 3. The duration of the contract is over 4 years, suggesting a long-term need for these services. 4. The total award amount is substantial at $170.4 million. 5. The sector is related to manufacturing, specifically irradiation apparatus.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The Cost Plus Award Fee structure allows for costs plus a fee based on performance. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to assess if the pricing is optimal. Benchmarking against similar contracts for irradiation apparatus manufacturing is needed.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This was a non-competitive delivery order, meaning only one vendor, Leidos, Inc., was solicited. This significantly limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition on a $170 million contract raises concerns about potential overspending of taxpayer funds.
Public Impact
Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. The Department of Homeland Security relies on this specialized equipment, impacting national security or operational capabilities. The long-term nature of the contract suggests a sustained government requirement for irradiation apparatus.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Non-competitive award
- Cost Plus Award Fee contract type
- Long contract duration
- Lack of small business participation
Positive Signals
- Award to established contractor (Leidos)
- Potential for performance-based incentives
Sector Analysis
The contract falls under Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing, a specialized niche within the broader manufacturing sector. Spending benchmarks for this specific type of apparatus are difficult to ascertain without more detailed information on the equipment's function and specifications.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation was not a factor in this contract award (sb: false). This suggests that opportunities for small businesses were not pursued or were deemed unsuitable for this specific requirement.
Oversight & Accountability
The non-competitive nature of this award warrants scrutiny from oversight bodies to ensure the government received fair value. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires robust monitoring to ensure performance incentives align with cost control.
Related Government Programs
- Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing
- Department of Homeland Security Contracting
- Office of Procurement Operations Programs
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Potential for cost overruns
- Lack of small business inclusion
- Long contract duration without clear performance metrics
- Limited transparency in pricing
Tags
irradiation-apparatus-manufacturing, department-of-homeland-security, ca, delivery-order, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Homeland Security awarded $17.0 million to LEIDOS, INC.. CAARS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Office of Procurement Operations).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $17.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2006-09-16. End: 2011-01-31.
What specific operational or national security needs justified a sole-source award for irradiation apparatus manufacturing, and were alternatives explored?
The justification for a sole-source award typically involves unique capabilities, urgent needs, or lack of viable alternatives. For irradiation apparatus, this could relate to highly specialized technology or proprietary processes held by Leidos. A thorough review would confirm if market research was conducted to ensure no other vendors could meet the requirements, or if the existing relationship and past performance were deemed essential for continuity.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee structure compare to fixed-price contracts for similar specialized manufacturing, and what are the potential cost implications?
Cost Plus Award Fee contracts offer flexibility but can incentivize higher spending if not carefully managed, as the contractor is reimbursed for costs plus a fee. Fixed-price contracts provide greater cost certainty for the government. For specialized manufacturing like irradiation apparatus, the complexity might necessitate a flexible contract type, but robust oversight is crucial to ensure the 'award fee' component drives efficiency and value, rather than simply rewarding cost incurrence.
What is the long-term strategic value of this $170 million investment in irradiation apparatus, and how does it align with DHS's mission objectives?
The long-term value hinges on the critical functions these irradiation apparatus perform for DHS. This could range from materials testing, sterilization, or specialized research supporting border security, counter-terrorism, or critical infrastructure protection. Understanding the specific application is key to assessing its strategic importance and ensuring the investment directly contributes to achieving departmental mission objectives effectively and efficiently.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
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: $17,041,640
Exercised Options: $17,041,640
Current Obligation: $17,041,640
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: HSHQDC06D00072
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2006-09-16
Current End Date: 2011-01-31
Potential End Date: 2011-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-02-11
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 Homeland Security Contracts
- THE United States Coast Guard HAS a Requirement to Procure UP to Twenty-Six (26) Fast Response Cutters (frcs) on a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Basis With an Economic Price Adjustment (EPA). Phase II of the FRC Program Will Complete the Fleet for a Total of 58 Cutters — $2.1B (Bollinger Shipyards Lockport, L.L.C.)
- Design and Construct NEW Vertical Barrier and Power Distribution, Lighting, Cameras, Equipment Shelters and Linear Ground Detection System (lgds) in Hildago County, NM — $1.8B (Fisher Sand & Gravel CO)
- Production&delivery of National Security Cutter (NSC) 6 — $1.7B (Huntington Ingalls Incorporated)
- YUM-2 Vertical Border and Waterborne Barrier Construction — $1.7B (Fisher Sand & Gravel CO)
- Construct Vertical Border Barrier — $1.6B (Fisher Sand & Gravel CO)