Department of the Navy awards $16.8M contract for MCIEAST Builder Assessment services to Stantec GS - WSP JV

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,831,458 ($16.8M)

Contractor: Stantec GS - WSP JV

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-06-26

End Date: 2026-03-22

Contract Duration: 634 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: MCIEAST BUILDER ASSESSMENT FY24

Place of Performance

Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92132

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $16.8 million to STANTEC GS - WSP JV for work described as: MCIEAST BUILDER ASSESSMENT FY24 Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is for engineering services, a critical component of infrastructure development and maintenance. 3. Performance period spans over 1.5 years, indicating a medium-term project. 4. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability. 5. The award is a delivery order, likely part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract. 6. The contractor is a joint venture, potentially bringing together diverse expertise.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $16.8 million for engineering services over approximately 21 months appears reasonable given the scope of builder assessment services. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering contracts for military installations suggests this falls within expected ranges. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, which is a positive indicator of value.

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 specific number of bidders is not provided, but this method generally fosters a competitive environment, which should lead to better pricing and service offerings for the government. The open competition suggests the government sought the best value proposition from the market.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through a robust bidding process and encourages a wider range of qualified contractors to participate, potentially driving down prices.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps Installations East (MCIEAST), receiving essential infrastructure assessment services. Services delivered include assessments crucial for maintaining and improving facilities at military bases. The geographic impact is focused on MCIEAST installations, primarily in California. The contract supports specialized engineering and assessment workforce needs.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific bidder count limits full assessment of competitive intensity.
Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen complexities arise in assessments, despite fixed-price structure.
Dependence on the joint venture's ability to integrate and deliver effectively.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive process.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty.
Contract duration allows for thorough assessment and planning.
Joint venture structure may leverage specialized expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), which is a significant segment of the federal contracting market, particularly for defense agencies. The market for these services is driven by the need for infrastructure maintenance, upgrades, and new construction at military installations. The $16.8 million award is a substantial but not exceptionally large contract within this domain, reflecting ongoing investments in facility management and readiness.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb flags are false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by this award. The primary contractor is a joint venture, which may or may not involve small business partners, but this information is not explicitly detailed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Navy contracting officers and program managers responsible for MCIEAST facilities. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics may not be publicly disclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Engineering Services
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Support
Infrastructure Assessment Contracts
Department of Defense Engineering Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost increases if scope is not well-defined.
Contractor performance risk associated with joint venture execution.
Dependence on accurate initial assessment to avoid future rework.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $16.8 million to STANTEC GS - WSP JV. MCIEAST BUILDER ASSESSMENT FY24

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is STANTEC GS - WSP JV.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $16.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-06-26. End: 2026-03-22.

What is the track record of Stantec GS - WSP JV as a joint venture in securing and performing federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Information on the specific track record of the 'Stantec GS - WSP JV' as a joint venture is not readily available in public databases. Stantec and WSP are both large, established engineering and professional services firms with extensive experience in government contracting individually. Stantec has a history of performing design, engineering, and construction management services for federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. WSP also has a significant portfolio of government projects. The formation of a joint venture suggests a strategic partnership to combine their respective strengths for a specific project like the MCIEAST Builder Assessment. A deeper dive into the individual performance records of Stantec and WSP on similar DoD contracts would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their capabilities and past performance.

How does the awarded amount of $16.8 million compare to similar engineering services contracts for military installation assessments?

The $16.8 million award for MCIEAST Builder Assessment services appears to be within a reasonable range for large-scale engineering and assessment contracts supporting military installations. Contracts for comprehensive facility assessments, master planning, and engineering studies for major commands can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars, depending on the scope, duration, and number of facilities involved. Given that this is a delivery order likely under a larger IDIQ vehicle, its value reflects a specific task order's scope. Benchmarking against other recent DoD engineering services contracts for similar purposes would provide more precise comparisons, but the value is consistent with the scale of operations for a command like MCIEAST.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they mitigated?

Key risks include potential scope creep if assessment requirements are not clearly defined, unforeseen technical challenges during the assessment phase, and contractor performance issues. Mitigation strategies are primarily embedded in the contract structure. The firm fixed-price nature helps control cost risks. The full and open competition process aims to select a capable contractor. The performance period of over 1.5 years allows for structured execution. Clear statement of work, regular progress reviews, and defined deliverables are standard mechanisms to manage scope and performance. The Department of the Navy's oversight will be crucial in identifying and addressing any emerging risks proactively.

How effective is the firm fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for money for this type of engineering assessment service?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring value for money for well-defined services like engineering assessments, as it shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. This incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently and deliver the specified services within the agreed budget. For services where the scope is clearly understood and quantifiable, FFP provides cost certainty for the government. However, if unforeseen complexities arise that significantly alter the scope, change orders could increase the total cost. The effectiveness relies heavily on the initial clarity and completeness of the SOW and the contractor's ability to execute efficiently.

What is the historical spending trend for engineering services by the Department of the Navy, and how does this award fit within that trend?

The Department of the Navy consistently spends billions of dollars annually on engineering, architectural, and related professional services to support its vast infrastructure and operational needs. This includes design, planning, assessment, and construction management services. Spending in this category fluctuates based on military construction priorities, facility modernization efforts, and readiness requirements. The $16.8 million award for MCIEAST Builder Assessment is a specific instance of this ongoing investment. It represents a portion of the Navy's broader commitment to maintaining and improving its shore installations, fitting within the expected pattern of significant, recurring expenditure on essential support services.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.

Address: 2496 OLD IVY RD STE 300, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA, 22903

Business Categories: Category Business, Foreign Owned, Foreign-Owned and U.S.-Incorporated Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $16,831,458

Exercised Options: $16,831,458

Current Obligation: $16,831,458

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247320D0615

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline