Defense contract for engineering services awarded to Innovative Productivity, Inc. for $11.3 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,319,490 ($11.3M)

Contractor: Innovative Productivity, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-07-15

End Date: 2007-09-30

Contract Duration: 807 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200510!367938!1700!N63394!PORT HUENEME DIVISION !N6339405C4001 !A!N! !N! ! !20050715!20051231!927941559!927941559!927941559!N!INNOVATIVE PRODUCTIVITY, INC !401 INDUSTRY ROAD SUITE 50!LOUISVILLE !KY!40208!48000!111!21!LOUISVILLE !JEFFERSON !KENTUCKY !+000005800000!N!N!000006096445!AE35!RDTE/MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-ENG/MANUF DEVEL !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !D!N!U!1!001!N!5A!C!N!Z! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! !1700!N63394!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: LOUISVILLE, JEFFERSON County, KENTUCKY, 40208

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.3 million to INNOVATIVE PRODUCTIVITY, INC. for work described as: 200510!367938!1700!N63394!PORT HUENEME DIVISION !N6339405C4001 !A!N! !N! ! !20050715!20051231!927941559!927941559!927941559!N!INNOVATIVE PRODUCTIVITY, INC !401 INDUSTRY ROAD SUITE 50!LOUISVILLE !KY!40208!48000!111!21!LOUISVILLE !JEFF… Key points: 1. Contract value of $11.3 million for engineering services. 2. Awarded to a single contractor, Innovative Productivity, Inc. 3. Contract duration of 807 days. 4. Primarily focused on research, development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E). 5. Service area appears to be manufacturing technology and engineering development. 6. No indication of small business set-aside or subcontracting.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $11.3 million for engineering services over approximately 2.6 years appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized RDT&E work. However, without specific benchmarks for 'Manufacturing Technology-Eng/Manuf Devel' services, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract type suggests that costs were estimated and a fixed fee was added, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. Comparing this to similar contracts for advanced manufacturing R&D would provide better context.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one contractor was solicited. This significantly limits competition and may result in higher prices than if multiple vendors had competed. The rationale for a sole-source award is not provided in the data, but it typically implies unique capabilities or urgent needs that only one firm can meet. The lack of competition means there was no price discovery through a bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without a competitive environment, there is less pressure on the contractor to offer the most cost-effective solution.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Defense and its associated agencies requiring advanced manufacturing technology and engineering development. Services delivered include research, development, testing, and evaluation in manufacturing technology. The geographic impact is centered around the contractor's location in Louisville, Kentucky, and potentially any military installations or research facilities where the technology is applied. Workforce implications include employment for engineers, technicians, and support staff at Innovative Productivity, Inc.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competition and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Lack of transparency regarding the justification for sole-source award.
Limited data on performance metrics or specific deliverables.
No indication of small business participation or subcontracting opportunities.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded for specialized RDT&E in manufacturing technology, potentially advancing defense capabilities.
Contractor has a specific address and location, indicating a tangible business entity.
Clear contract start and end dates provide a defined period of performance.
The contract falls under a specific NAICS code (541330) for Engineering Services, indicating a defined scope.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically focusing on Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) related to manufacturing technology. The broader market for engineering services is substantial, encompassing a wide range of specialized expertise. Contracts like this are crucial for the defense industrial base, driving innovation in areas critical to national security. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within defense RDT&E budgets for advanced manufacturing and industrial base modernization.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false) and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements. This suggests that the primary contractor, Innovative Productivity, Inc., was expected to perform the work itself or through its own resources. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting opportunities for small businesses stemming from this specific award, nor is there an explicit effort to boost the small business ecosystem through this contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), as indicated by the 'sa' field. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, including adherence to the scope of work, budget, and schedule. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature of the award and the lack of publicly available performance reports. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense RDT&E Spending
Manufacturing Technology Programs
Engineering and Technical Services Contracts
Naval Facilities and Engineering Command Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award may indicate limited competition.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can pose cost control risks.
Lack of detailed performance data limits assessment of value.
No information on small business participation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.3 million to INNOVATIVE PRODUCTIVITY, INC.. 200510!367938!1700!N63394!PORT HUENEME DIVISION !N6339405C4001 !A!N! !N! ! !20050715!20051231!927941559!927941559!927941559!N!INNOVATIVE PRODUCTIVITY, INC !401 INDUSTRY ROAD SUITE 50!LOUISVILLE !KY!40208!48000!111!21!LOUISVILLE !JEFFERSON !KENTUCKY !+000005800000!N!N!000006096445!AE35!RDTE/MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-ENG/MANUF DEVEL !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is INNOVATIVE PRODUCTIVITY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-07-15. End: 2007-09-30.

What is the specific nature of the 'Manufacturing Technology-Eng/Manuf Devel' services provided under this contract?

The data indicates the contract's purpose is 'RDTE/MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-ENG/MANUF DEVEL', falling under the NAICS code 541330 for Engineering Services. This suggests the work involved research, development, testing, and evaluation focused on advancing manufacturing processes, technologies, or the development of new manufacturing capabilities. Specific deliverables or projects are not detailed in the provided data, but it likely pertains to improving or creating methods for producing defense-related equipment or components more efficiently, effectively, or with enhanced capabilities.

How does the $11.3 million contract value compare to similar RDT&E contracts in manufacturing technology?

Direct comparison is difficult without access to a comprehensive database of similar sole-source RDT&E contracts for manufacturing technology. However, $11.3 million for a nearly two-year period (807 days) for specialized engineering and development work is not unusually high in the defense sector. RDT&E projects often involve significant intellectual capital and specialized equipment. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure means the final cost is composed of estimated costs plus a negotiated profit. Benchmarking would require analyzing contracts with similar scopes, durations, and contractor capabilities, ideally those awarded competitively to establish a clearer market price.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for RDT&E?

The primary risk of a sole-source award is the lack of competitive pressure, which can lead to inflated pricing and reduced incentive for efficiency. For RDT&E, the inherent uncertainty in research and development introduces risks of cost overruns and schedule delays. A cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract, while allowing for flexibility, can incentivize the contractor to incur more costs to increase the base upon which the fixed fee is calculated, unless stringent oversight and cost controls are in place. There's also a risk that the unique capabilities claimed by the sole-source provider might not be as exclusive or effective as initially assessed.

What is the track record of Innovative Productivity, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

The provided data shows Innovative Productivity, Inc. as the contractor for this specific $11.3 million sole-source award. Beyond this single contract, the data does not offer details on the company's broader federal contracting history, past performance ratings, or previous awards. To assess their track record, one would need to consult databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for a more comprehensive view of their performance on other government contracts, including their success rates, quality of work, and adherence to contract terms.

What are the historical spending patterns for engineering services related to manufacturing technology within the Department of Defense?

Historical spending patterns for this specific niche within the Department of Defense are not detailed in the provided data. However, the DoD consistently invests significant funds in RDT&E to maintain technological superiority. Manufacturing technology is a critical component of the defense industrial base, ensuring the ability to produce advanced weapon systems and components. Spending in this area fluctuates based on strategic priorities, technological advancements, and specific program needs. Analyzing broader DoD RDT&E budgets and specific manufacturing modernization initiatives would provide context for this contract's place within historical spending trends.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › ECONOMIC GROWTH/PRODUCTIVITY R&D

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: 401 INDUSTRY ROAD SUITE 50, LOUISVILLE, KY, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline