DoD's $25M Engineering Services Contract Awarded to Day & Zimmermann Inc. in 2003

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,992,541 ($25.0M)

Contractor: DAY & Zimmermann Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-11-21

End Date: 2009-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,957 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92155

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $25.0 million to DAY & ZIMMERMANN INCORPORATED for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded for engineering services, indicating a need for specialized technical expertise. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential price discovery and value. 3. A long duration of 1957 days suggests a significant, ongoing requirement for these services. 4. The firm fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but the lack of competition limits benchmarking. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, this contract falls under the broader Department of Defense spending umbrella. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to a focus on engineering services.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to the lack of competitive bidding. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to cap costs, but without comparison to other offers, it's difficult to ascertain if the $25 million awarded represents a fair market price. The long duration and sole-source nature warrant scrutiny to ensure continued value for money throughout the contract's life.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not openly competed. This approach is typically used when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement, or in specific circumstances like urgent needs. The absence of multiple bidders limits the government's ability to leverage competition to drive down prices and ensure the most advantageous terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government may not benefit from the price reductions typically achieved through competitive bidding processes.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from specialized engineering expertise to support its operations and projects. Services delivered likely include design, analysis, testing, and technical support for naval systems or infrastructure. The geographic impact is centered in California, where the contract was awarded and likely performed. The contract supports a professional workforce within the engineering services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than a competed contract.
Long contract duration could indicate potential for scope creep or evolving requirements not fully captured in initial pricing.
Sole-source awards can reduce transparency in government spending.
The absence of a small business set-aside raises questions about opportunities for smaller firms in this contract.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to an established entity like Day & Zimmermann suggests a potentially reliable provider of services.
The contract addresses a specific need within the Department of Defense, indicating a clear purpose.

Sector Analysis

Engineering services, classified under NAICS code 541330, represent a significant segment of the professional services market supporting government and private sector projects. This contract fits within the broader defense industrial base, where specialized engineering is crucial for maintaining and developing military capabilities. Comparable spending in this sector often involves large, complex projects requiring deep technical knowledge and project management expertise.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside, nor is there information indicating subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The award to a single, likely larger, entity suggests that the primary focus was on securing specialized engineering capabilities rather than promoting small business participation. This could limit the ecosystem of small businesses involved in supporting defense engineering needs.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, making it harder for the public to scrutinize the value proposition.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Engineering Contracts
Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Contracts
Professional Services Contracts
Sole-Source Defense Contracts
Engineering Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Long contract duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $25.0 million to DAY & ZIMMERMANN INCORPORATED. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DAY & ZIMMERMANN INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $25.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-11-21. End: 2009-03-31.

What specific engineering services were provided under this contract?

While the data indicates 'Engineering Services' under NAICS 541330, the precise nature of the services rendered under this $25 million contract awarded to Day & Zimmermann Inc. by the Department of the Navy is not detailed in the provided information. Typically, engineering services can encompass a wide range of activities including, but not limited to, research and development, design, analysis, testing, systems integration, technical support, and project management for various naval platforms, systems, or infrastructure. Given the long duration (1957 days) and the firm fixed-price nature, it likely involved substantial, well-defined engineering tasks critical to naval operations or modernization efforts.

How does the $25 million contract value compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the Department of the Navy?

Directly comparing the $25 million value of this specific contract to similar ones is difficult without more context on the scope and duration of those other contracts. However, $25 million is a substantial sum for engineering services, suggesting a significant project or a long-term support requirement. The Department of the Navy procures a wide array of engineering services, ranging from smaller, specialized consulting tasks to large-scale system design and development. The fact that this was a sole-source award for nearly 2000 days implies it was likely a critical and unique requirement that justified the lack of competition and the significant investment.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for engineering services?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source award is the potential for inflated pricing due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without competing bids, the government may not achieve the best possible price or terms. Other risks include a lack of innovation that competition might foster, and potential complacency from the awarded contractor who faces no immediate threat from rivals. Furthermore, if the sole source is unable to perform adequately or faces unforeseen challenges, the government has limited alternative options, potentially leading to project delays or cost overruns.

What does the long contract duration (1957 days) imply about the nature of the engineering services required?

A contract duration of 1957 days, which is over five years, strongly suggests that the engineering services required were for a long-term, sustained need rather than a short-term project. This could involve ongoing support for existing systems, long-term research and development initiatives, phased development of new technologies or platforms, or continuous technical assistance. Such durations often indicate a strategic requirement where stability and a deep understanding of the client's needs are paramount, justifying the commitment to a single provider, especially if that provider developed unique expertise or intellectual property related to the requirement.

How does the firm fixed-price contract type influence the risk allocation in this sole-source engineering services contract?

In a firm fixed-price (FFP) contract, the price is set and not subject to adjustment based on the contractor's cost experience. This shifts the primary cost risk to the contractor. For Day & Zimmermann Inc., this means they are responsible for managing their costs to deliver the specified engineering services within the $25 million budget. If their costs exceed the agreed-upon price, their profit margin decreases or they may incur a loss. Conversely, if they can deliver the services more efficiently than anticipated, their profit increases. This structure provides cost certainty for the Department of the Navy, but the lack of competition means the initial price might have been set higher to account for the contractor's perceived risk.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1818 MARKET STREET, PHILADELPHIA, PA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Timeline