DoD's $31.7M engineering services contract to Peraton Inc. awarded in 2005 shows long-term engagement
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $31,674,754 ($31.7M)
Contractor: Peraton Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2005-04-01
End Date: 2010-07-31
Contract Duration: 1,947 days
Daily Burn Rate: $16.3K/day
Competition Type: FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Other
Place of Performance
Location: HERNDON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20170
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $31.7 million to PERATON INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded under a follow-on to a competed action, suggesting prior competition influenced this award. 2. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure indicates potential for cost overruns, requiring close monitoring. 3. A duration of 1947 days (over 5 years) suggests a significant, ongoing need for these engineering services. 4. The contract's value of over $31 million indicates a substantial investment in engineering support. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted for small business participation. 6. The contractor, Peraton Inc., has a history with the Department of Defense, implying familiarity with agency requirements.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's total value of $31.7 million over approximately five years averages to about $6.3 million annually. Without specific benchmarks for similar engineering services contracts within the Department of Defense, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing structure inherently carries a higher risk of cost escalation compared to fixed-price contracts. This necessitates robust oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and aligned with the services delivered.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: unknown
The contract is described as a 'FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION,' which implies that the original contract was competed. However, the specific competition details for this particular award, including the number of bidders and the extent of the competition, are not provided in the available data. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to assess whether the follow-on action benefited from competitive pricing or if it was awarded under less competitive circumstances.
Taxpayer Impact: When competition is limited on follow-on actions, taxpayers may not benefit from the most cost-effective pricing that a robust bidding process typically ensures.
Public Impact
The Department of Defense benefits from specialized engineering services crucial for its operations. This contract supports the maintenance and advancement of defense systems and infrastructure. The services likely impact national security by ensuring the readiness and effectiveness of military assets. The contract's duration suggests a sustained need for engineering expertise within the defense sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts can lead to higher final costs if not managed diligently.
- Lack of specific competition details for this follow-on action raises questions about optimal price discovery.
- The long duration of the contract could indicate a lack of flexibility or potential for vendor lock-in if not periodically re-evaluated.
Positive Signals
- Awarded as a follow-on to a competed action, suggesting a foundation of prior competition.
- Contractor Peraton Inc. has a history with the agency, potentially indicating reliability and understanding of requirements.
- The contract's substantial value suggests it addresses a significant and ongoing need for critical engineering services.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector supports various government agencies, particularly in areas requiring specialized technical expertise. The Department of Defense is a major consumer of such services, often awarding large, long-term contracts for complex engineering solutions. Benchmarking this contract's value against similar DoD engineering contracts would require access to a broader dataset of defense spending in this category.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the procurement was likely aimed at larger, established firms capable of handling the scope and complexity of the engineering services required. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a specific small business set-aside provision within this contract's award details.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of Defense's contract management and oversight bodies, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is listed as the servicing agency. Accountability measures would be embedded within the contract's terms and conditions, including performance metrics and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases, though specific performance details and cost breakdowns may be subject to confidentiality.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Engineering Services
- Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Contracts
- Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contracts
- Follow-on Contracts
- Engineering and Technical Support Services
Risk Flags
- Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee structure carries inherent cost overrun risk.
- Limited transparency on competition for this follow-on action.
- Lack of specific service details hinders performance evaluation.
Tags
engineering-services, department-of-defense, cost-plus-fixed-fee, definitive-contract, follow-on-action, peraton-inc, virginia, large-contract, professional-services, technical-services, defense-contract-management-agency
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $31.7 million to PERATON INC.. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is PERATON 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 $31.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-04-01. End: 2010-07-31.
What was the original contract that this 'FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION' succeeded, and what were its key terms and competition details?
The provided data indicates this contract (ID: 16268) is a 'FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION' with a start date of 2005-04-01 and an end date of 2010-07-31, valued at $31,674,753.99. However, the specific details of the original contract, such as its award date, contractor, value, and the nature of its competition, are not directly available in this dataset. To understand the full context, one would need to access historical procurement records or contract databases that link this follow-on action to its predecessor. Typically, a follow-on action implies that the original contract underwent a competitive bidding process, and this subsequent award is either a continuation, modification, or a new contract awarded to the same or a different contractor based on the prior competition's success or evolving needs.
How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the Department of Defense during the same period?
This contract has an approximate annual value of $6.3 million ($31.7 million / 5 years). To benchmark this against similar Department of Defense (DoD) engineering services contracts from 2005-2010, a comprehensive analysis of the DoD's procurement data for that period would be necessary. Such an analysis would involve identifying contracts with similar North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes (e.g., 541330 - Engineering Services) and comparing their total values, durations, and pricing structures. Without access to this comparative data, it is difficult to definitively state whether $6.3 million annually represents a high, low, or average cost for comparable DoD engineering services during that timeframe. Factors like contract scope, complexity, and specific technical requirements significantly influence pricing.
What specific engineering services were provided under this contract, and what were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure success?
The provided data classifies this contract under NAICS code 541330, 'Engineering Services,' and lists the primary contractor as PERATON INC. However, the specific nature of the engineering services rendered (e.g., design, analysis, testing, systems integration) and the associated Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are not detailed in the available information. These details would typically be found within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS). Understanding these specifics is crucial for assessing the contract's effectiveness and the value delivered to the Department of Defense. Without this granular information, it's challenging to evaluate the contractor's performance beyond the fact that the contract was fulfilled until its expiration date.
Given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, what were the mechanisms in place to control costs and prevent overruns?
Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts, like this one, involve the government reimbursing the contractor for allowable costs plus a fixed fee representing profit. To control costs and prevent overruns under a CPFF structure, the Department of Defense typically employs several oversight mechanisms. These include rigorous review and approval processes for all claimed costs, detailed audits, and establishing clear ceilings or limitations on the total contract cost. Furthermore, the contract would likely include provisions for regular progress reviews, performance monitoring against milestones, and potentially incentive clauses tied to cost savings or efficiency. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), listed as the servicing agency, plays a critical role in overseeing contractor expenditures and ensuring compliance with the contract's cost principles.
What is Peraton Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense, particularly concerning contracts of similar size and duration?
The data indicates Peraton Inc. is the contractor for this $31.7 million, five-year engineering services contract with the Department of Defense (DoD). While this specific contract shows a long-term engagement, a comprehensive assessment of Peraton's track record with the DoD would require analyzing their entire contract history. This includes examining the number of contracts awarded, their values, performance ratings, any past performance issues or disputes, and their success in winning competitive bids. Peraton is a known entity in the government contracting space, particularly in IT and mission support services. Their history with the DoD likely involves a range of services and contract types, and understanding their performance on similar large, long-duration engineering contracts would provide better insight into their reliability and capability.
What does the contract's expiration date (2010-07-31) suggest about the long-term strategic needs of the Department of Defense for these engineering services?
The contract's expiration date in July 2010, following a start date in April 2005, indicates a planned engagement period of over five years for specific engineering services. This duration suggests that the Department of Defense (DoD) identified a sustained, long-term requirement for the expertise or support provided under this contract. Such long-term planning is common for critical defense functions where continuity of service is essential, or where the development and implementation of complex systems require extended periods. The expiration implies that either the need was fulfilled, the contract was succeeded by another, or the DoD's strategic priorities shifted, leading to the conclusion of this particular engagement.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › OTHER RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 12975 WORLDGATE DR STE 7322, HERNDON, VA, 20170
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $89,331
Exercised Options: $89,331
Current Obligation: $31,674,754
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-04-01
Current End Date: 2010-07-31
Potential End Date: 2010-07-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2024-04-16
More Contracts from Peraton Inc.
- 200107!000034!5700!GZ80 !smc/Pks !F0470101C0001 !A!N!*!Y! !20001103!20061031!052819732!052819732!001216845!n!itt Industries, Inc , Systems !4410 E Fountain Blvd !colorado Sprin !co!80916!16000!041!08!colorado Springs !EL Paso !colorado !+000016429445!n!n!000000000000!ac26!rdte/Missile and Space Systems-Mgmt Support !A2 !missile and Space Systems !3000!NOT Discernable or Classified !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!B! !A !Y!R!2!003!B! !A!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !c!c!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! — $1.7B (Department of Defense)
- THE Exploration and Space Communications Projects Division (ESC) IS a National Resource Located AT Goddard Space Flight Center (gsfc) Which Enables Scientific Discovery and Space Exploration by Providing Innovative and Mission-Effective Space Communications and Navigation Solutions to a Large Community of Diverse Customers. ESC Manages Operational Geostationary Communications Relay Satellites and Ground Systems for the Space Communications and Navigation (scan) Program AT Nasa Headquarters. Today, Scan Network Systems Consist of the Space Network (SN), the Near Earth Network (NEN), and the Deep Space Network (DSN). the Day-To-Day Management of These Three Networks IS Currently NOT Fully Consistent. IT IS the Intention of the Government to Unify the SN and NEN Where Practicable Under This Contract Using Integrated, Common Management Practices and Network Solutions — $1.5B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Nasa Goddard Space Flight Center's (gsfc) Goal for the Space Communications Networks Services Contract (scns) IS to Enable Mission Success for Every Customer Using Scns Services. KEY Objectives of the Scns Contract ARE to Decrease Cost and Maintain or Improve Operational Efficiency and Reliability, While Maintaining an Acceptable Level of Risk and Providing for Safe Operation of the Missions. the Contractor Shall Implement a Safety, Health, and Mission Assurance Program That Provides a Safe and Healthy Work Environment, Minimizes Program Risk, and Maximizes Nasa Mission Success. the Contractor Shall BE Responsible and Accountable for Achieving the Required Results. Core Requirement Functions, Such AS Configuration Management, Quality Assurance, ETC. ARE Required to Support Idiq Task Orders. the Space Network (SN) IS Comprised of a Fleet of On-Orbit Tracking and Data Relay Satellites (tdrs) and Associated Ground Systems That Provide Telecommunications Services. the Nature of the SN Architecture, I.E., Extremely Large Capital Investment, Contractor Operated Facilities, Continuous 24X7 Requirements, ETC., Lends Itself to a Core Requirements Approach. the Ground Network (GN) Consists of an Orbital Tracking Network and the Satellite Laser Ranging Network. the Nature of the Ground Network Architecture, I.E., Diverse MIX of Commercial and Government Assets, Evolving Geographic and Technical Customer Requirements, and Legacy Systems, ETC. Lends Itself to an Idiq Approach. Other Activities, I.E., Very Long Baseline Interferometry Network Operations and Maintenance (O&M), Electronic System Test Laboratory, Requirements Development, Hardware and Software Development, ETC. ARE Best Suited to an Idiq Approach in the Resource-Constrained Environment That Nasa Operates in — $1.2B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Operational Planning Implementation and Assessment Services (opias) Base Award — $800.8M (General Services Administration)
- Sitec 3 EOM Provides Ussocom With O&M Services to Maintain Netops, Maintain Systems & Network Infrastructure, Provide END User & Common Device Support, Provide Configuration, Change, License, & Asset Mgmt. Conduct Training and Perform Imacs Services — $651.0M (General Services 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)