DoD's $22M Engineering Support Contract Awarded to Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. in 2012

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,033,837 ($22.0M)

Contractor: Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-10-01

End Date: 2015-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: FY13 SYS ENGINEERING AND ANALYSIS SUPP

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22311

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.0 million to SYSTEMS PLANNING AND ANALYSIS, INC. for work described as: FY13 SYS ENGINEERING AND ANALYSIS SUPP Key points: 1. Contract awarded for engineering and analysis support services. 2. Services were procured through a sole-source, not-competed process. 3. The contract duration spanned nearly three years. 4. The award was made by the Department of the Navy. 5. The contractor, Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc., has a history of supporting government contracts. 6. The contract type was Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can present cost control challenges. 7. The contract was active during FY13, with significant spending in that fiscal year.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of approximately $22 million over three years for engineering and analysis support is moderate for a Department of Defense contract. Without specific performance metrics or a detailed breakdown of services rendered, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while offering flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently. Benchmarking against similar sole-source engineering support contracts within the Navy or DoD would provide a clearer picture of its pricing competitiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the unique capabilities or qualifications required for the specific service, or in cases of urgent need. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery and potential cost savings that a competitive bidding process could have provided. The justification for this sole-source award would need to be thoroughly documented to ensure it was appropriate.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government does not have the leverage of multiple bids to drive down prices. It also limits opportunities for other qualified businesses to secure government contracts.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of the Navy and its operational readiness, through the provision of essential engineering and analysis support. The services delivered likely contributed to the planning, development, or sustainment of naval systems and capabilities. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational and administrative areas of the Department of the Navy, with potential reach to naval bases and facilities. The contract supported specialized engineering and analytical roles, potentially impacting a small, highly skilled workforce within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and taxpayer value.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type may incentivize cost overruns if not tightly managed.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-sourcing could obscure potential alternatives.
Limited public data on specific deliverables makes performance assessment difficult.

Positive Signals

Contract provided specialized engineering and analysis support critical to naval operations.
Contractor, Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc., likely possesses relevant expertise for the services rendered.
Contract duration suggests a sustained need for the services provided.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS code 541330), which is a significant component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services market supporting the defense industry. The defense sector relies heavily on specialized engineering firms for system design, analysis, testing, and integration. Spending in this area is often driven by the development of new platforms, upgrades to existing systems, and the need for advanced analytical capabilities to support complex military operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within the DoD's overall budget for engineering and technical support services.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. The contractor, Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc., is not typically classified as a small business. Therefore, this contract likely did not directly contribute to small business subcontracting goals unless the prime contractor actively engaged small businesses in its supply chain, which is not detailed in the provided data. The absence of a small business set-aside means opportunities for small businesses in this specific procurement were limited.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the contracting officers and program managers within the Department of the Navy responsible for the engineering and analysis support services. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, including reporting requirements and performance standards. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the proprietary information typically associated with defense engineering contracts. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Engineering Services
Naval Systems Engineering Support
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Sole Source Procurements
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
CPFF contract type poses potential cost control risks.
Limited public data on performance outcomes.
No clear indication of small business participation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.0 million to SYSTEMS PLANNING AND ANALYSIS, INC.. FY13 SYS ENGINEERING AND ANALYSIS SUPP

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SYSTEMS PLANNING AND ANALYSIS, 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 $22.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-10-01. End: 2015-09-30.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED' and awarded as 'sole-source'. While the specific justification is not detailed, common reasons for sole-source awards in defense contracting include unique technical capabilities possessed by only one vendor, urgent and compelling needs where competition is impractical, or when the service is a follow-on to a previously competed effort where only one contractor can provide the necessary integration. For this contract, the Department of the Navy would have had to formally document and approve the justification, likely citing specialized engineering expertise or proprietary technology held by Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. that was essential for the required support.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type compare to other contract types in terms of cost efficiency for this type of service?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are often used for research and development or complex services where the scope of work is not well-defined at the outset, allowing for flexibility. The 'cost-plus' portion means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs, while the 'fixed fee' represents the contractor's profit, which is negotiated upfront and remains constant. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPFF can be less cost-efficient for the government because the contractor has less incentive to control costs, as their allowable expenses are reimbursed. However, for highly uncertain or evolving technical requirements, CPFF can be more appropriate than fixed-price contracts, which might lead to scope creep or change orders if not meticulously defined. Value-for-money assessments for CPFF contracts heavily rely on robust government oversight and cost monitoring.

What is the typical track record of Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. with government contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. (SPA) has a significant history of performing contracts for the U.S. Department of Defense and other federal agencies. They specialize in providing advanced technical, analytical, and programmatic support services. Their portfolio often includes areas like naval systems engineering, acquisition support, operational analysis, and cybersecurity. SPA is generally regarded as a reputable contractor within the defense sector, known for its technical expertise. Reviews of their contract performance would typically be found in government databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or through past performance evaluations conducted by agencies. Their consistent award of contracts suggests a generally positive track record, though specific performance details for individual contracts would vary.

Can we assess the program effectiveness or the specific outcomes achieved by this contract based on the available data?

The provided data is limited to contract award details (value, dates, type, contractor, agency) and does not include specific performance metrics, deliverables, or outcomes. Therefore, a direct assessment of program effectiveness or the specific results achieved by this $22 million engineering and analysis support contract is not possible. To evaluate effectiveness, one would need access to contract performance reports, milestone achievements, user feedback from the Department of the Navy, and potentially independent reviews of the engineering solutions or analyses provided by Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. The duration and value suggest a substantial effort, but without qualitative or quantitative performance data, effectiveness remains unknown.

How does this contract's spending pattern compare to historical spending for similar engineering support services within the Navy?

The data shows a total award obligation of $22,033,837.20 for this contract, spanning from October 1, 2012, to September 30, 2015. The 'br' field indicates a reported obligation of $20,141 in FY13. Without broader historical spending data for comparable engineering and analysis support services within the Department of the Navy, it is difficult to establish a precise comparison. However, $22 million over three years for specialized engineering support is a moderate figure within the context of the Navy's multi-billion dollar annual budget. To make a meaningful comparison, one would need to analyze trends in Navy spending on similar NAICS codes (like 541330) and contract types (like CPFF or sole-source) over multiple fiscal years.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2001 N BEAUREGARD ST., SUITE 100, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22311

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,309,171

Exercised Options: $24,612,111

Current Obligation: $22,033,837

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline