Navy awards $8.7M contract for engineering services, with a 98% prime contractor performance rating

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $8,743,838 ($8.7M)

Contractor: Noblis MSD LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2023-09-26

End Date: 2026-03-06

Contract Duration: 892 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: CANES FFG HW3 ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS, TDP REDLINES AND FIRST ARTICLE PRODUCTION

Place of Performance

Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92152

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $8.7 million to NOBLIS MSD LLC for work described as: CANES FFG HW3 ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS, TDP REDLINES AND FIRST ARTICLE PRODUCTION Key points: 1. The contract focuses on engineering services, specifically related to assembly instructions and production data for hardware. 2. Performance on this contract is rated excellent by the Navy, indicating high satisfaction with the contractor's delivery. 3. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 4. The prime contractor, NOBLIS MSD LLC, has a strong performance history with the Department of the Navy. 5. The contract duration is over two years, spanning from late 2023 to mid-2026. 6. This award represents a small portion of the overall engineering services spending within the Department of Defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: excellent

The contract's value of $8.7 million for engineering services appears reasonable given the scope of providing assembly instructions, technical data redlines, and first article production. The prime contractor's excellent performance rating (98%) suggests that the Navy received good value for the funds expended. Benchmarking against similar engineering support contracts within the DoD would provide a more precise assessment, but the high performance rating is a strong 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 multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this method generally fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The Navy's choice of this procurement method suggests confidence in achieving a fair market price through a broad solicitation.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that is designed to secure the best possible price and quality for the required engineering services.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from the specialized engineering services provided, ensuring accurate production data for hardware. This contract supports the development and refinement of critical hardware components through detailed instructions and data. The services delivered are essential for the manufacturing and quality assurance processes within the naval defense sector. The primary beneficiaries are the naval engineering and acquisition teams responsible for hardware development and procurement.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if technical data redlines require extensive rework beyond initial estimates.
Dependence on contractor expertise could pose a risk if key personnel depart during the contract period.
Ensuring timely delivery of first article production is critical to avoid delays in subsequent hardware phases.

Positive Signals

High prime contractor performance rating (98%) indicates reliability and quality of service.
Award through full and open competition suggests a robust selection process and potential for competitive pricing.
Contract duration provides stability for the contractor to execute the required engineering tasks effectively.

Sector Analysis

The engineering services sector within the defense industry is characterized by specialized firms providing critical support for complex weapon systems and platforms. This contract, focusing on hardware assembly instructions and production data, fits within the broader category of technical support and systems engineering. Comparable spending in this area can vary widely based on the complexity and scale of the hardware involved, but such services are fundamental to maintaining technological superiority.

Small Business Impact

This contract was awarded to NOBLIS MSD LLC and does not appear to have a small business set-aside component (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the direct impact on small business participation through this specific award is likely minimal. However, the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors, depending on their own subcontracting plans and the nature of the work required.

Oversight & Accountability

The Department of the Navy is responsible for the oversight of this contract, ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions. Performance monitoring, quality assurance reviews, and payment approvals are standard oversight mechanisms. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, and accountability is maintained through performance metrics and potential remedies for non-performance. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Contracts
Department of Defense Engineering Services
Hardware Production Support Contracts
Technical Data Management
First Article Inspection and Approval

Risk Flags

Potential cost overruns due to CPFF contract type.
Risk of key personnel departure impacting project continuity.
Timeliness of first article production is critical for downstream activities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $8.7 million to NOBLIS MSD LLC. CANES FFG HW3 ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS, TDP REDLINES AND FIRST ARTICLE PRODUCTION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NOBLIS MSD LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $8.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-09-26. End: 2026-03-06.

What is the specific nature of the 'CANES FFG HW3 ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS, TDP REDLINES AND FIRST ARTICLE PRODUCTION'?

The contract data indicates a focus on the production and documentation of hardware for the CANES (Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services) program, specifically for the FFG (Frigate) class of ships, hardware version 3 (HW3). This involves creating and refining assembly instructions, which are crucial for the correct manufacturing of the hardware. Technical Data Package (TDP) redlines suggest that existing technical documentation is being reviewed and updated based on production feedback or design changes. The 'First Article Production' component means the contractor is responsible for producing and likely testing the initial unit(s) of the hardware to ensure it meets all specifications before full-scale production begins. This is a critical step in quality control and validation.

How does the prime contractor's performance rating of 98% compare to industry benchmarks for engineering services?

A 98% performance rating is exceptionally high and generally considered excellent within the federal contracting landscape. While specific industry benchmarks can vary by sub-sector and agency, ratings above 90% are typically indicative of outstanding performance. For engineering services, which often involve complex technical requirements and tight deadlines, consistently achieving such a high score suggests the contractor, NOBLIS MSD LLC, has a strong track record of meeting or exceeding expectations regarding quality, timeliness, and adherence to contract terms. This high rating provides significant confidence to the Department of the Navy regarding the contractor's capabilities and reliability for this specific task.

What are the potential risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this service?

The contract type is listed as 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' (CPFF), which means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee representing profit. While CPFF contracts can be suitable for research and development or when the scope is uncertain, they carry inherent risks. For the government, there's a risk that costs could escalate beyond initial projections, although the fixed fee limits the contractor's profit. The contractor has less incentive to control costs compared to fixed-price contracts, as their allowable costs are reimbursed. Effective oversight by the agency is crucial to ensure costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract. For this specific contract, the CPFF structure might be used if the TDP redlines or first article production involve unforeseen technical challenges that could impact costs.

What is the historical spending pattern for engineering services by the Department of the Navy in this category?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for engineering services by the Department of the Navy requires access to comprehensive contract databases. However, it's generally understood that the Navy, as a major branch of the DoD, expends significant resources on engineering and technical support across its various platforms and systems, including shipbuilding, aircraft, and IT infrastructure. Contracts for technical data, production support, and systems integration are common. The $8.7 million awarded here for specific hardware production support appears to be a moderate-sized award within the broader context of the Navy's overall engineering services budget, which can run into billions of dollars annually across numerous contracts.

How does the geographic location of performance (California) influence contract execution and oversight?

The contract indicates performance in California ('sn': 'CALIFORNIA'). This geographic location can influence contract execution and oversight in several ways. If the contractor's facilities are located in California, it may streamline communication and site visits for Navy personnel stationed there or nearby. It also means that any physical inspections or reviews of the first article production would be conducted on-site in California. Oversight might involve personnel from Naval facilities or commands located within the state. Conversely, if the Navy personnel overseeing the contract are located elsewhere, travel costs and coordination efforts might increase. California is a hub for defense contractors, so having a presence there is common for companies supporting the Navy.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - NETWORK

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N6600121R0041

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: ONE CRESCENT DR STE 400, PHILADELPHIA, PA, 19112

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $8,743,838

Exercised Options: $8,743,838

Current Obligation: $8,743,838

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 15

Total Subaward Amount: $5,196,819

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6600121D0153

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline