DoD's $13.9M Engineering Services Contract with Carter and Burgess Inc. Awarded in 2005
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $13,899,866 ($13.9M)
Contractor: Carter and Burgess Incorporated
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2005-09-23
End Date: 2012-12-31
Contract Duration: 2,656 days
Daily Burn Rate: $5.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: 30% DESIGN
Place of Performance
Location: SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR County, TEXAS, 78232
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $13.9 million to CARTER AND BURGESS INCORPORATED for work described as: 30% DESIGN Key points: 1. Contract value of $13.9 million over 7 years suggests a moderate investment in engineering services. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. A firm-fixed-price contract type generally shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The duration of over 7 years may indicate a long-term need for these engineering services. 5. The contract was awarded to Carter and Burgess Incorporated, a single entity. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to a focus on engineering services.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's value of $13.9 million over approximately 7 years averages to about $2 million per year. Without specific deliverables or scope of work, direct comparison to similar contracts is challenging. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to control costs. Benchmarking the value would require understanding the specific engineering services provided and their complexity.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. With 3 bidders, the competition level appears moderate. This suggests that while multiple companies vied for the contract, the number of bidders might not have been extensive enough to drive prices down to the absolute lowest possible point.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages a wider range of offers and can lead to more competitive pricing. The presence of multiple bidders, even if limited, provides a basis for price discovery and ensures that the government is not locked into a single provider's pricing.
Public Impact
The Department of the Army benefits from specialized engineering services to support its operations. The contract likely supports infrastructure development, maintenance, or design projects within the Army's purview. Services are likely concentrated in Texas, the stated place of performance. The contract may indirectly support a workforce of engineers and technical staff employed by Carter and Burgess Incorporated.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Contract duration of over 7 years could lead to potential cost overruns if project requirements change significantly.
- Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the contractor's efficiency and effectiveness.
- Firm-fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to reduced scope or quality if not carefully managed, though this is a general risk.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process.
- Firm-fixed-price contract type aligns incentives for cost control.
- The contract was awarded to a single entity, simplifying management and accountability.
Sector Analysis
Engineering services, classified under NAICS code 541330, represent a significant sector within the professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This contract falls within the broader defense sector spending, where engineering expertise is crucial for designing, building, and maintaining complex military infrastructure and systems. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific type of engineering services rendered, such as civil, mechanical, or electrical engineering, and their application within defense contexts.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. As a definitive contract awarded to a single large business, Carter and Burgess Incorporated, the direct impact on small businesses is likely minimal unless they were involved as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities were pursued or mandated.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Engineering Contracts
- Army Corps of Engineers Contracts
- Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Contracts
- Infrastructure Development Contracts
Risk Flags
- Contract duration exceeds 7 years, potentially increasing risk of scope creep or obsolescence.
- Limited competition (3 bidders) may indicate potential for suboptimal pricing.
- Lack of detailed performance metrics in summary data hinders thorough value assessment.
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, engineering-services, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, texas, large-business, professional-scientific-and-technical-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $13.9 million to CARTER AND BURGESS INCORPORATED. 30% DESIGN
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CARTER AND BURGESS INCORPORATED.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $13.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-09-23. End: 2012-12-31.
What specific engineering services were provided under this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract was for 'Engineering Services' under NAICS code 541330. However, the specific nature of these services is not detailed. This could range from architectural design, civil engineering for infrastructure, mechanical engineering for facilities, or specialized technical consulting. Without a Statement of Work (SOW) or contract line item details, it's impossible to ascertain the precise deliverables. Such information is crucial for evaluating the contract's true value and performance against its intended objectives.
How does the $13.9 million contract value compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the Department of the Army during that period?
Comparing the $13.9 million value requires context on the scope and duration. Awarded in 2005 for services extending to late 2012 (over 7 years), the annual average is approximately $2 million. This is a moderate value for large-scale engineering projects. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify comparable Army contracts for similar engineering disciplines (e.g., civil, structural, environmental) awarded within the same timeframe, considering factors like geographic location, project complexity, and specific deliverables. Without this comparative data, assessing whether this contract represented good value for money is difficult.
What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Carter and Burgess Incorporated's performance?
The provided data does not include information on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or specific metrics used to evaluate Carter and Burgess Incorporated's performance. For a firm-fixed-price contract, performance is typically assessed against the successful completion of defined tasks and adherence to specifications outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW). Government contract officers would have monitored progress and quality, but the specific metrics are not publicly available in this dataset. A thorough review would require access to contract performance reports or award-fee documentation, if applicable.
What is the historical spending trend for engineering services by the Department of the Army, and how does this contract fit within that trend?
The provided data offers a snapshot of a single contract. To understand historical spending trends for engineering services by the Department of the Army, one would need to analyze aggregated spending data over multiple fiscal years, broken down by NAICS codes like 541330. This contract, valued at $13.9 million over seven years, represents a portion of that spending. Analyzing trends would reveal whether spending on such services has increased, decreased, or remained stable, and whether this particular contract was typical, unusually large, or small in the context of overall Army procurement for engineering support.
Were there any significant challenges or disputes encountered during the performance of this contract?
The provided data does not contain information regarding challenges or disputes related to this contract. Contract performance issues, such as delays, scope changes, or quality concerns, can lead to contract modifications, claims, or even termination for default. Without access to contract administration records, inspector general reports, or litigation databases, it is not possible to determine if any significant challenges or disputes arose during the execution of this $13.9 million engineering services contract.
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
Solicitation ID: W9126G05R0010
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc
Address: 777 MAIN ST STE 2100, FORT WORTH, TX, 76102
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $14,510,059
Exercised Options: $14,510,059
Current Obligation: $13,899,866
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-09-23
Current End Date: 2012-12-31
Potential End Date: 2012-12-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-04-01
More Contracts from Carter and Burgess Incorporated
- TBD- Checkpoint Site Surveys — $16.0M (Department of Homeland Security)
View all Carter and Burgess Incorporated federal contracts →
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)