Leidos, Inc. awarded $61.1M for Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) Phase 1 by the Department of the Army
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $61,099,213 ($61.1M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2008-08-15
End Date: 2019-01-25
Contract Duration: 3,815 days
Daily Burn Rate: $16.0K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: PHASE 1 OF JOINT EXPEDITIONARY COLLECTIVE PROTECTION (JECP) FAMILY OF SYSTEMS.
Place of Performance
Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $61.1 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: PHASE 1 OF JOINT EXPEDITIONARY COLLECTIVE PROTECTION (JECP) FAMILY OF SYSTEMS. Key points: 1. Contract awarded to Leidos, Inc. for Phase 1 of the JECP Family of Systems. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee, indicating shared risk and reward. 3. Performance period spanned over 10 years, from August 2008 to January 2019. 4. The contract was awarded under full and open competition. 5. The base contract value was approximately $61.1 million. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, with Leidos based in Virginia.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure suggests an effort to control costs while incentivizing performance, but the final cost relative to achieved objectives is not readily apparent. Comparing it to similar large-scale defense system development contracts would require access to proprietary cost data and independent cost-benefit analyses. The duration of the contract also suggests a complex and potentially evolving project.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 3 bidders indicates a moderate level of competition for this significant defense contract. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages a wider range of solutions and drives down prices through market forces, ensuring the government receives the best value.
Public Impact
This contract supports the Department of the Army's efforts to develop and field the Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) system. The JECP system is designed to provide protection for personnel in expeditionary environments. The successful development and deployment of this system would enhance soldier survivability and operational readiness. The contract likely involved significant research and development, potentially leading to advancements in protective technologies. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Defense's operational theaters, with potential for widespread use by military personnel.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Incentive Fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
- The long performance period could introduce risks related to technological obsolescence or changing requirements.
- Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value for money achieved.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust and fair bidding process.
- The contract aims to deliver critical protection capabilities for military personnel.
- The selection of Leidos, Inc., a known defense contractor, suggests a level of confidence in their ability to execute complex projects.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically focusing on the development of protective systems for military personnel. The market for defense systems is characterized by high R&D investment, long procurement cycles, and significant government oversight. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other large-scale system development contracts within the Department of Defense, particularly those related to soldier protection, C4ISR, or vehicle modernization.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless Leidos, Inc. voluntarily engaged small businesses as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.
Oversight & Accountability
As a Department of Defense contract, this would be subject to oversight from the Department of Defense's various Inspector General offices, Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). Transparency would be managed through contract reporting mechanisms and potential public releases of unclassified information. Accountability would be tied to the Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure and contract milestones.
Related Government Programs
- Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) Family of Systems
- Department of the Army Procurement
- Defense Systems Development
- Soldier Protection Systems
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration may increase risk of cost escalation and technological obsolescence.
- Cost Plus Incentive Fee contracts require careful monitoring to ensure cost control.
- Specific performance metrics and final outcomes not detailed, hindering value assessment.
Tags
defense, department-of-the-army, leidos-inc, cost-plus-incentive-fee, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, system-development, virginia, multi-year-contract, naics-314912
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $61.1 million to LEIDOS, INC.. PHASE 1 OF JOINT EXPEDITIONARY COLLECTIVE PROTECTION (JECP) FAMILY OF SYSTEMS.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $61.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-08-15. End: 2019-01-25.
What was the specific nature of the 'Canvas and Related Product Mills' associated with this contract?
The 'Canvas and Related Product Mills' designation (NAICS code 314912) typically refers to establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing canvas products, such as tents, awnings, tarpaulins, and sails, or in manufacturing related fabricated textile products. In the context of the Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) Family of Systems, this likely relates to the fabrication of protective shelters, covers, or components that utilize durable textile materials. The JECP system aims to provide a protected environment against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats, and the 'canvas and related products' could refer to the specialized fabric enclosures or structural elements that form part of this protection system, possibly incorporating advanced materials for filtration and containment.
How did the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structure influence the final cost and performance of this contract?
The Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract structure is designed to incentivize the contractor to control costs while achieving specific performance targets. In a CPIF arrangement, the final fee (profit) is adjusted based on the relationship between the final costs and the target costs, as well as the achievement of pre-defined performance objectives. If the contractor performs below target cost and meets performance goals, they receive a higher fee. Conversely, if costs exceed the target or performance is subpar, the fee is reduced. For this $61.1 million contract, the CPIF structure aimed to align Leidos, Inc.'s financial interests with those of the Department of the Army. While the exact final cost and performance outcomes are not detailed here, the CPIF suggests a collaborative approach to managing project expenses and ensuring the JECP system met its intended protective capabilities effectively.
What were the key performance objectives or milestones for Phase 1 of the JECP Family of Systems?
Specific key performance objectives and milestones for Phase 1 of the JECP Family of Systems are not publicly detailed in the provided data. However, based on the nature of defense system development, Phase 1 typically involves foundational research, design, prototyping, and initial testing. For the JECP, objectives would likely have included defining system requirements, developing preliminary designs for collective protection shelters and associated equipment, demonstrating the feasibility of key technologies (e.g., air filtration, environmental control), and potentially producing early prototypes for government evaluation. The 'incentive fee' component of the contract suggests that specific, measurable performance targets related to these objectives, such as protection levels achieved, system reliability, or operational effectiveness in simulated environments, were established and tied to contractor profit.
What is the significance of the JECP Family of Systems for the Department of the Army's operational capabilities?
The Joint Expeditionary Collective Protection (JECP) Family of Systems is significant for the Department of the Army as it aims to enhance the survivability and operational effectiveness of personnel in environments where they may be exposed to chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) threats. Expeditionary operations often occur in austere or contested environments where such threats are a concern. A robust JECP system would allow soldiers to operate, rest, and maintain equipment within a protected environment, reducing the impact of CBRN hazards on personnel readiness and mission accomplishment. This capability is crucial for maintaining force projection and sustained operations in high-risk scenarios, thereby bolstering the Army's overall strategic flexibility and resilience.
How does the contract duration of over 10 years impact the assessment of value for money?
A contract duration exceeding 10 years, as seen with this JECP Phase 1 contract (August 2008 - January 2019), introduces complexities in assessing value for money. On one hand, long durations can be necessary for complex research, development, and integration projects, allowing for iterative improvements and adaptation to evolving requirements. This can potentially lead to a more mature and effective final product. On the other hand, extended timelines increase the risk of cost escalation due to inflation, changes in technology, and potential scope creep. Furthermore, assessing value requires comparing the total cost incurred over the decade against the realized benefits and operational capabilities delivered, which can be challenging years after completion. Without detailed post-award performance reviews and cost analyses, it's difficult to definitively state if the value proposition held true throughout the contract's lifecycle.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Textile Product Mills › Canvas and Related Product Mills
Product/Service Code: TEXTILE/LEATHER/FUR; TENT; FLAG
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: W52H0907R0350
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Address: 10260 CAMPUS POINT DR, SAN DIEGO, CA, 92121
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $61,375,407
Exercised Options: $61,196,643
Current Obligation: $61,099,213
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-08-15
Current End Date: 2019-01-25
Potential End Date: 2019-01-25 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-09-29
More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.
- Science Operation and Maintenance Support for the United States Antarctic Program — $3.1B (National Science Foundation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Department of Transportation)
- THE Facilities Development and Operations Contract(fdoc) Specifies Technical, Managerial, and Adminstrative Work Needed to Ensure the Availablitity, Integrity, and Reliability of Missionoperations Facilites Supporting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa) Human Space Flight (HSF) Programs Requiring Mission Operations Support. the Objective of This Contract IS to Consolidate Efforts Across the Facilities Covered Under Fodoc in Order to Maximize Synergy for Hardware and Software Development, Modification, Sustaining. Maintenance, Reconfiguration, and Operations for the Purpose of Reducing Cost Without Compromising Facility Functionality and Performance. Nasa Will Collaborate With the Contractor on Developing Procedural and Technical Innovations That Improve Quality, Ensure Customer Satisfaction and Reduce Cost. Mission Operations Facilities Currently Support the Space Shuttle Programand the International Space Station Progra, Including International Partner and Commmercial Visiting Vehicles. Mission Operations Facilities Supporting the Cnstellation Program(cxp) ARE Continuously Under Development in Concert With CXP Formulation and Implementation. Fdoc Applies to the Facilities of These Three Programs, and ANY Other HSF Program Requiring Mission Operations Facility Support. in Addition, Future Mission Operations Facilities and Capabilities ARE Within the Technical Scope of This SOW, and Fdoc Worlk Associated With These Facilities Will BE Enabled Through Idiq — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Airspace System (NAS) Implementation Support Contract (nisc). Provides Engineering and Technical Support Services to FAA Organizations Responsible for NAS Transformation, Integration and Implementation in the Areas of Implementation and Integration Planning, Transition Planning, Engineering Support, Environmental Support, Automation Support and Other Engineering and Technical Disciplines AS Required. TAS::69 8107::TAS — $1.1B (Department of Transportation)
- Itssc Task Order for Systems — $1.1B (Social Security Administration)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)