DoD's $19M Logistic Program Management Contract Awarded to Sierra Management & Technologies Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,013,780 ($19.0M)

Contractor: Sierra Management & Technologies Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-12-30

End Date: 2012-08-17

Contract Duration: 2,057 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: LOGISTIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR PMA207

Place of Performance

Location: PATUXENT RIVER, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20670

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.0 million to SIERRA MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGIES INC for work described as: LOGISTIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR PMA207 Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which can incentivize cost control but also carries inherent risk. 3. Performance period spans over 2000 days, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract was awarded as a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to Engineering Services, a critical support function. 6. The contract is managed by the Department of the Navy, indicating a specific military branch's requirement. 7. The base award amount is approximately $19 million, with a duration of over 2000 days.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $19 million contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure means the government pays actual costs plus a fixed fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. While the fixed fee provides some cost certainty for the contractor's profit, the overall cost to the government is variable. Comparing this to other logistic program management contracts of similar scope and duration would be necessary for a more definitive value assessment.

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 bids. The presence of 3 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific delivery order. While 'full and open' is generally preferred for maximizing competition, the number of bidders can vary significantly based on the specialized nature of the services and the overall market for such expertise.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and improve service quality. A moderate number of bidders, like the 3 in this case, suggests that while competition was present, there may be room for further market engagement to ensure the most cost-effective outcome.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its logistic programs, receiving essential management and engineering support. Services delivered include program management and engineering expertise crucial for the effective operation of logistic systems. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the Navy's operational areas and supporting infrastructure, primarily in Maryland. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled professionals in program management, engineering, and logistics within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

CPFF contract type can lead to cost uncertainty for the government if not closely monitored.
Long performance period (over 2000 days) requires sustained oversight to ensure continued value.
Limited information on the number of bidders (3) makes it difficult to fully assess the extent of competition.
No specific performance metrics provided to gauge the effectiveness of the services rendered.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating an effort to maximize market participation.
Contractor (Sierra Management & Technologies Inc.) has a track record of performing government contracts.
Delivery order structure suggests it aligns with a broader strategic acquisition framework.
Engineering services are critical for complex defense logistics, implying a necessary and valuable function.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting logistic program management for the Department of Defense. The market for defense logistics support is substantial, driven by the complex global operations of the military. Companies like Sierra Management & Technologies Inc. provide specialized expertise that is often outsourced due to the need for agility and specific skill sets not always maintained in-house by government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar program management and engineering support within the defense sector, particularly for naval aviation programs.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have been set aside for small businesses, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem. Without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, it's difficult to assess the extent to which small businesses may have benefited from this contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the program management office within the Department of the Navy. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure necessitates rigorous financial oversight to ensure that costs are reasonable and allocable, and that the fixed fee is earned. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms, though specific details on public accessibility of performance reports are not provided. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Logistics Agency Support Contracts
Naval Aviation Program Management
Engineering Services for Government Programs
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Vehicles

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent cost uncertainty for the government.
Long contract duration requires sustained oversight to ensure continued value and performance.
Limited number of bidders (3) may indicate potential market concentration or specialized requirements.
Lack of publicly available performance metrics makes objective assessment of value difficult.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.0 million to SIERRA MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGIES INC. LOGISTIC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR PMA207

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIERRA MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGIES 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 $19.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-12-30. End: 2012-08-17.

What is the track record of Sierra Management & Technologies Inc. in performing similar logistic program management and engineering services for the Department of Defense?

Sierra Management & Technologies Inc. has a history of performing various government contracts, including those related to program management and engineering support. While this specific contract is for logistic program management, the company's broader portfolio likely includes related services. A detailed analysis would involve reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) for this contractor on similar projects. These reports typically assess factors such as technical performance, cost control, schedule adherence, and management. Without access to specific CPARS data for this contract or closely related ones, it's difficult to provide a definitive assessment of their track record beyond their general presence in the government contracting space.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure of this contract compare to alternative contract types for similar services, and what are the implications for value for money?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or involves a high degree of uncertainty, such as in research and development or complex program management. It allows the contractor to recover all allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers less cost certainty for the government, as the final cost is not capped. However, it can be advantageous when innovation or flexibility is paramount. For value for money, CPFF requires robust government oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and the fixed fee is justified. If the work is well-defined, an FFP contract might offer better cost control. The choice of CPFF suggests that the Navy prioritized flexibility and expertise over strict cost predictability for this logistic program management.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this logistic program management contract, and how has the contractor performed against them?

Specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract are not publicly detailed in the provided data. Typically, for logistic program management, KPIs might include metrics related to on-time delivery of support, cost savings achieved, efficiency improvements in supply chain operations, successful program milestone completion, and adherence to budget. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure implies that performance is monitored through cost and schedule adherence, as well as the achievement of defined program objectives. Without access to contractor performance reports or specific contract deliverables, it is not possible to assess how Sierra Management & Technologies Inc. has performed against these potential KPIs.

What is the historical spending trend for logistic program management and engineering services within the Department of the Navy, and how does this contract fit into that trend?

The Department of the Navy, like other branches of the DoD, consistently invests significant resources in logistic program management and engineering services due to the complexity of maintaining global operational readiness. Historical spending in this area is substantial and often fluctuates based on strategic priorities, new platform acquisitions, and modernization efforts. This $19 million contract, awarded in 2006 and ending in 2012, represents a specific investment within a broader, ongoing expenditure pattern. Analyzing trends would require examining annual spending data for similar service categories over multiple fiscal years to identify patterns of increase or decrease, and to understand how this contract's value aligns with overall budgetary allocations for logistics support.

What are the potential risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for logistic program management, and what mitigation strategies are typically employed?

The primary risk with a CPFF contract is the potential for cost overruns, as the government bears the risk of actual costs incurred. If the contractor's cost accounting is not rigorous or if unforeseen issues drive up expenses, the total cost to the government can exceed initial estimates. Another risk is the contractor's incentive to increase costs to maximize the base for future fee calculations, although the fixed fee mitigates this to some extent. Mitigation strategies typically include strong government oversight, detailed cost audits, clear definition of allowable costs, robust Earned Value Management (EVM) systems, and performance-based incentives where applicable. Regular reviews of the contractor's progress and expenditures are crucial to manage these risks effectively.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002406R3248

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 44427 AIRPORT RD STE 130, CALIFORNIA, MD, 20619

Business Categories: Category Business, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $90,386,464

Exercised Options: $36,273,095

Current Obligation: $19,013,780

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017805D4559

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline