DoD's $245M contract for policy review and development services awarded to Raytheon Technical Services Co

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,531,820 ($24.5M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-10-21

End Date: 2007-09-30

Contract Duration: 709 days

Daily Burn Rate: $34.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200601!009119!1700!M67004!COMMANDER !GS10F0229L !C!N! !N!M6700406F0205! !20051021!20060930!931871438!112820840!001339159!N!RAYTHEON TECHNICAL SERVICES CO!12160 SUNRISE VALLEY DRIVE!RESTON !VA!20191!66672!059!51!RESTON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000003000000!N!N!000000000000!R406!POLICY REVIEW/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541614!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !C!N! ! ! ! ! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! !Y!1727!M67446!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: BURLINGTON, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01803

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.5 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: 200601!009119!1700!M67004!COMMANDER !GS10F0229L !C!N! !N!M6700406F0205! !20051021!20060930!931871438!112820840!001339159!N!RAYTHEON TECHNICAL SERVICES CO!12160 SUNRISE VALLEY DRIVE!RESTON !VA!20191!66672!059!51!RESTON !FAIR… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for policy review and development services, indicating a need for strategic guidance and analysis. 2. Raytheon Technical Services Co. secured this significant contract, highlighting their role in supporting defense policy initiatives. 3. The contract duration of 709 days suggests a substantial, ongoing requirement for these specialized services. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, this contract implies a competitive bidding process that could lead to favorable pricing. 5. The primary service category is 'Policy Review/Development Services', suggesting a focus on strategic planning and governmental processes. 6. The contract's value of over $245 million underscores the importance and scale of the policy support required by the Department of Defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $245,318,204.41 for policy review and development services appears to be within a reasonable range for a large-scale federal contract of this nature. Benchmarking against similar large-scale policy development contracts within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. However, the scale of the award suggests a significant scope of work that justifies the expenditure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely solicited and evaluated. This competitive process is generally expected to drive down costs and ensure the government receives the best value. The number of bidders and the specific evaluation criteria would further clarify the extent of competition and its impact on pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive bidding process that aims to secure services at the most advantageous price, preventing potential overspending and ensuring efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from expert policy analysis and development, crucial for effective strategic planning and execution. Services delivered include policy review and development, contributing to the refinement and implementation of defense strategies. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Defense's operational sphere, potentially affecting national security policy. Workforce implications may include the engagement of specialized policy analysts, researchers, and subject matter experts, both within the contractor and potentially within government agencies receiving the support.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if policy objectives are not clearly defined and managed.
Reliance on contractor expertise could lead to a reduction in internal government policy development capabilities over time.
Ensuring the objectivity and impartiality of policy recommendations from a contracted entity requires robust oversight.

Positive Signals

Award to a large, established contractor like Raytheon suggests a high likelihood of successful project execution and adherence to timelines.
The use of a firm-fixed-price contract structure can provide cost certainty for the government.
The contract's focus on policy development indicates a strategic investment in shaping future defense initiatives.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on management and technical consulting. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services, particularly within defense and intelligence agencies, to navigate complex policy landscapes and technological advancements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale policy support contracts awarded to major defense contractors.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting plans for small businesses. The primary awardee, Raytheon Technical Services Co., is a large corporation. This suggests that the primary focus of this contract is on large-scale capabilities, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited unless Raytheon actively engages small business subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting agency (Department of the Navy) through designated contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be defined in the contract terms, including performance metrics and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement databases like FPDS, where contract awards are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Policy and Strategy Development
Government Consulting Services
Federal Contract Management
Strategic Planning Support
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Potential for contractor recommendations to be biased towards specific solutions or technologies.
Risk of insufficient government oversight leading to suboptimal policy outcomes.
Dependency on contractor expertise could diminish internal government capabilities over time.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.5 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. 200601!009119!1700!M67004!COMMANDER !GS10F0229L !C!N! !N!M6700406F0205! !20051021!20060930!931871438!112820840!001339159!N!RAYTHEON TECHNICAL SERVICES CO!12160 SUNRISE VALLEY DRIVE!RESTON !VA!20191!66672!059!51!RESTON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000003000000!N!N!000000000000!R406!POLICY REVIEW/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541614!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-10-21. End: 2007-09-30.

What is the track record of Raytheon Technical Services Co. in delivering similar policy development and review services to the federal government?

Raytheon Technical Services Co., a subsidiary of Raytheon Company, has a substantial history of providing a wide array of technical and professional services to the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense. Their expertise spans areas such as engineering, logistics, intelligence, and information technology. While specific details on their policy development track record for this particular contract are not provided in the summary data, their extensive experience with complex government programs suggests a capacity to handle policy-related tasks. A deeper dive into past performance evaluations and contract histories would be necessary to fully assess their success in delivering comparable policy services, including their ability to meet deadlines, manage budgets, and achieve client objectives in policy formulation and review.

How does the awarded amount of $245 million compare to the typical spending for similar policy review and development contracts within the DoD?

The $245 million award for policy review and development services is a significant sum, indicative of a large-scale, long-term engagement. To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against the average and median contract values for similar services within the Department of Defense over a comparable period. Factors such as the contract duration (709 days), the specific scope of policy areas covered, and the level of expertise required would influence the expected cost. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts, it's challenging to definitively state if this amount is high, low, or average. However, given the scale and the prime contractor's profile, it suggests a critical and extensive policy support requirement.

What are the primary risks associated with a contract of this magnitude and nature, and how are they mitigated?

A contract of this magnitude ($245M) for policy review and development carries several inherent risks. One primary risk is the potential for misalignment between the contractor's output and the government's evolving strategic needs, leading to ineffective policies. Another risk is the contractor's potential lack of deep, institutional knowledge compared to government personnel, which could impact the practicality or long-term viability of proposed policies. Furthermore, there's a risk of 'scope creep,' where the project expands beyond its original objectives, increasing costs and timelines. Mitigation strategies typically include clearly defined performance work statements, robust government oversight, regular progress reviews, phased delivery schedules, and performance-based payment structures. Ensuring clear communication channels and maintaining government control over final policy decisions are also crucial.

What is the expected effectiveness of the policy review and development services delivered under this contract in achieving DoD's strategic objectives?

The effectiveness of these services hinges on several factors, including the clarity of the DoD's strategic objectives, the quality of the contractor's analysis and recommendations, and the government's ability to integrate these into actionable policies. If Raytheon Technical Services Co. provides insightful, data-driven, and forward-looking policy recommendations that align with the DoD's mission, the contract can be highly effective. Conversely, if the services are perceived as generic or disconnected from operational realities, their effectiveness will be limited. The contract's success will ultimately be measured by whether the resulting policies enhance the DoD's capabilities, efficiency, and strategic positioning. Ongoing evaluation and feedback loops between the government and the contractor are essential to ensure alignment and effectiveness throughout the contract period.

How has federal spending on policy review and development services, particularly within the defense sector, trended in recent years?

Federal spending on policy review and development services, especially within the defense sector, has generally seen fluctuations influenced by geopolitical events, national security priorities, and shifts in administration policies. In recent years, there has been a sustained emphasis on modernizing defense capabilities, adapting to new technological threats, and refining strategic doctrines. This often translates into increased demand for expert analysis and policy formulation. While specific aggregate data for 'policy review and development services' can be challenging to isolate, broader categories like 'Management and Management Consulting Services' (NAICS 541611) and 'Other Scientific and Technical Services' (NAICS 5417) within the defense budget often reflect this trend. Increased spending in these areas suggests a continuous need for specialized external expertise to support complex decision-making processes within the DoD.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Process, Physical Distribution, and Logistics Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 141 SPRING ST, LEXINGTON, MA, 05

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS10F0229L

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline