DoD's $17.6M engineering services contract with Advanced Systems Supportability Engineering Technologies awarded via sole-source justification

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,646,078 ($17.6M)

Contractor: Advanced Systems Supportability Engineering Technologies and Tools, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-02-01

End Date: 2026-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: ENGINEERING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT

Place of Performance

Location: MANASSAS, PRINCE WILLIAM County, VIRGINIA, 20109

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.6 million to ADVANCED SYSTEMS SUPPORTABILITY ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGIES AND TOOLS, INC for work described as: ENGINEERING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential price overruns and limited market engagement. 2. The contract duration of five years suggests a long-term need for specialized engineering support. 3. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure may incentivize cost escalation, requiring robust oversight. 4. The absence of small business set-aside indicates a focus on specialized capabilities rather than broad economic participation. 5. Virginia is the primary state for contract performance, potentially concentrating economic benefits. 6. The contract's value, while significant, needs to be benchmarked against similar specialized engineering services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $17.6 million over five years for engineering design and development services is substantial. Without specific benchmarks for comparable sole-source contracts for advanced systems supportability, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The CPFF structure, while common for R&D, carries inherent risks of cost growth. The awarded amount should be compared to industry standards for similar specialized engineering tasks to determine if it represents a fair price, especially given the lack of competitive pressure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning the Department of the Navy did not conduct a competitive bidding process. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities or proprietary technology essential for the requirement. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to achieve the lowest possible price and may indicate a lack of readily available alternatives.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be receiving the best possible price, as competition is a key driver for cost savings. This approach bypasses opportunities to discover more cost-effective solutions or innovative approaches from a wider pool of vendors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Navy, which receives specialized engineering design and development services for advanced systems. The contract supports the development and enhancement of critical defense systems, contributing to national security. Work is expected to be performed in Virginia, potentially creating or sustaining high-skilled engineering jobs in the region. The services delivered are crucial for the lifecycle support and modernization of complex military technologies.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potential for cost savings.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Lack of small business participation may limit broader economic impact and subcontracting opportunities.
Long contract duration (5 years) increases exposure to potential scope creep or evolving requirements without re-competition.

Positive Signals

Award to a specialized firm suggests access to critical, unique technical expertise.
Long-term contract indicates a sustained and important need for the services provided.
Clear performance period (5 years) allows for structured project management and delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a critical component of the defense industrial base. The market for specialized systems engineering and supportability is often characterized by high barriers to entry due to technical expertise and security requirements. While the overall engineering services market is vast, contracts for advanced defense systems are typically concentrated among a few highly specialized firms. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's pricing and scope to other sole-source or competitively awarded contracts for similar defense engineering support.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the data indicates no small business participation (sb: false). This suggests the requirement is for highly specialized capabilities that are either not available from small businesses or were not pursued through a small business set-aside. Consequently, there are limited direct subcontracting opportunities for small businesses under this specific award, potentially impacting the broader small business defense ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Given the CPFF structure, rigorous financial oversight and performance monitoring are crucial to manage costs and ensure value. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract modifications, performance reports, and payment data should be accessible through federal procurement databases. Inspector General involvement would be triggered by specific allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Engineering Services
Advanced Systems Development
Naval Systems Support
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Sole Source Procurements

Risk Flags

Sole-source justification requires careful review to ensure necessity.
CPFF contract type necessitates stringent cost monitoring.
Long-term contract duration increases risk of obsolescence or changing needs.
Lack of small business participation limits economic opportunity.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.6 million to ADVANCED SYSTEMS SUPPORTABILITY ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGIES AND TOOLS, INC. ENGINEERING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ADVANCED SYSTEMS SUPPORTABILITY ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGIES AND TOOLS, 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 $17.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-02-01. End: 2026-01-31.

What is the track record of Advanced Systems Supportability Engineering Technologies and Tools, Inc. with the Department of Defense?

Advanced Systems Supportability Engineering Technologies and Tools, Inc. (ASSETT) has a history of performing contracts, particularly within the defense sector. While specific details on past performance metrics for this company require deeper database analysis, their selection for a sole-source, multi-year contract by the Department of the Navy suggests a demonstrated capability and potentially a prior positive relationship. Further investigation into their contract history, including past performance reviews, any contract disputes, and the types of services previously rendered, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and expertise in fulfilling complex engineering requirements for the DoD.

How does the $17.6 million value compare to similar sole-source engineering contracts for advanced systems?

Benchmarking the $17.6 million value requires identifying comparable sole-source contracts for 'Advanced Systems Supportability Engineering Technologies and Tools' or similar specialized defense engineering services. Without access to a curated database of such comparisons, a precise assessment is difficult. However, for a five-year duration, this value suggests a significant scope of work, likely involving complex design, analysis, and development. If similar sole-source awards for comparable complexity and duration are in the $10-15 million range, this contract might be considered on the higher end, warranting scrutiny of the justification for its value. Conversely, if comparable contracts are $20 million or more, it could be seen as reasonable.

What are the primary risks associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type in this context?

The primary risk with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract is the potential for cost overruns. While the 'fixed fee' component provides some predictability for the contractor's profit, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred. If the contractor's costs exceed initial estimates, the total contract value increases. This structure can incentivize less cost-conscious behavior if not managed diligently. For the government, this necessitates robust oversight of incurred costs, detailed auditing, and strict adherence to the contract's scope to prevent scope creep that inflates expenses without commensurate value. The CPFF is often used when the scope is not well-defined, but this also increases the risk of unforeseen expenses.

What does the sole-source award imply about the availability of alternative contractors for these specialized engineering services?

A sole-source award strongly implies that the government determined only one contractor, Advanced Systems Supportability Engineering Technologies and Tools, Inc., possesses the unique capabilities, technology, or expertise required for this specific need. This could be due to proprietary knowledge, specialized facilities, or a long-standing, integrated role in a particular defense system. It suggests a limited market for these highly specialized engineering services, potentially indicating a niche area where few companies operate. This lack of alternatives reduces the government's leverage in price negotiations and limits opportunities for innovation from a broader range of potential providers.

How might the five-year duration impact the overall cost-effectiveness and relevance of the engineering services?

The five-year duration provides continuity and allows for the deep integration of the contractor's expertise into long-term defense system development or sustainment. This can be cost-effective by avoiding the overhead and transition costs associated with frequent re-competition. However, it also extends the government's commitment and exposure to potential cost increases over time. Furthermore, technology and defense needs can evolve rapidly. A five-year contract might risk locking the government into specific solutions or approaches that become outdated, potentially diminishing cost-effectiveness if the services do not adapt to emerging requirements or if more efficient technologies become available.

What are the potential implications of this contract for future spending on similar engineering support within the Department of the Navy?

This contract could set a precedent for future spending on similar advanced systems supportability engineering. If the services provided are deemed critical and successful, the Department of the Navy might continue to rely on ASSETT or similar sole-source providers for related needs. This could lead to a pattern of non-competitive awards in this specialized niche, potentially increasing overall spending in this area without the benefit of competitive pricing. Conversely, if the contract reveals opportunities for broader competition or more cost-effective solutions through different approaches, it could inform future procurement strategies to encourage greater market engagement and value.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: FIRE CONTROL EQPT.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: N0002420R6104

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 11220 ASSETT LOOP STE 204, MANASSAS, VA, 20109

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $36,386,761

Exercised Options: $34,902,761

Current Obligation: $17,646,078

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline