DOD's $17.5M Engineering Services Contract Awarded to WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC. for Network Support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,449,299 ($17.4M)

Contractor: Wintec Arrowmaker, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-25

End Date: 2013-09-24

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: OMNIPRESENT PERVASIVE NETWORKS

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WASHINGTON, PRINCE GEORGE'S County, MARYLAND, 20744

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.4 million to WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC. for work described as: OMNIPRESENT PERVASIVE NETWORKS Key points: 1. Contract value of $17.5 million over 4 years suggests a significant investment in engineering services. 2. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' contract type indicates potential for cost overruns, requiring close monitoring. 3. Awarded under 'Full and Open Competition', this contract likely benefited from competitive pricing. 4. The engineering services sector is critical for defense infrastructure, highlighting the contract's strategic importance. 5. A duration of 4 years allows for sustained support but also necessitates performance evaluation over time. 6. The contract's focus on network support aligns with modern defense requirements for robust communication systems.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $17.5 million over four years averages to about $4.4 million annually. Without specific benchmarks for similar network engineering support contracts within the Department of Defense, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' structure, while allowing flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if not managed tightly. The competition level suggests a potentially fair price was achieved.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This approach generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and a wider range of technical solutions. The presence of multiple bidders, though not explicitly stated in the provided data, is implied by the competition type. This level of competition is ideal for ensuring the government receives the best value.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is the most advantageous for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through a robust bidding process and encourages innovation among contractors.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from enhanced network infrastructure and engineering support. Military personnel and operations are supported through reliable and advanced communication networks. The contract contributes to the modernization of defense communication systems. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers and technical specialists within WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC. and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize contractors to increase costs to maximize their fee, necessitating stringent oversight.
The long duration of the contract (4 years) could lead to scope creep or evolving requirements that may not be optimally priced.
Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's efficiency and effectiveness over time.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that likely yielded a fair price.
The contract addresses a critical need for network engineering services within the Department of Defense.
The fixed fee component of the contract provides some level of cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

The engineering services sector, particularly within the defense industry, is characterized by complex projects requiring specialized expertise. This contract falls under NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services), a broad category encompassing design, consulting, and project management. The defense sector's reliance on advanced technology and secure communication networks makes such contracts essential for maintaining operational readiness. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale network infrastructure and engineering support contracts awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside requirement. However, the prime contractor, WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC., may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall business strategy or to meet broader socioeconomic goals, though this is not mandated by the contract type presented.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' structure necessitates diligent financial oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and allocable, and that the fixed fee is earned. Transparency would be facilitated through regular reporting requirements from the contractor and potentially through contract performance reviews. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction isn't detailed, the DoD IG typically has oversight over all DoD contracts to investigate fraud, waste, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense IT Services
Army Network Modernization Programs
Engineering and Technical Services Contracts
Defense Communications Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
Long contract duration may lead to scope creep or outdated technology if not managed proactively.
Performance metrics not explicitly detailed, making objective assessment of value-for-money challenging.
Potential for contractor to prioritize fee over cost efficiency in CPFF structure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.4 million to WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC.. OMNIPRESENT PERVASIVE NETWORKS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WINTEC ARROWMAKER, 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 $17.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-25. End: 2013-09-24.

What is the track record of WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC. with the Department of Defense, particularly on similar network engineering contracts?

Assessing WINTEC ARROWMAKER, INC.'s track record requires a deeper dive into their contract history with the Department of Defense (DoD). While this specific contract (DCA, awarded 2009) is a data point, understanding their performance on past and current contracts is crucial. Key indicators would include past performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), any history of contract disputes, timely delivery, and adherence to budget. For network engineering contracts, specific experience with large-scale, secure communication systems, cybersecurity integration, and system lifecycle management would be highly relevant. Without access to detailed performance reports and a broader contract portfolio analysis, it's difficult to definitively gauge their reliability and expertise beyond this single award.

How does the average annual value of this contract compare to similar network engineering support contracts within the DoD?

The average annual value of this contract is approximately $4.36 million ($17.45M / 4 years). To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against a portfolio of similar contracts awarded by the DoD for network engineering and support services. Factors influencing comparison include contract scope (e.g., design, implementation, maintenance), technology involved (e.g., wired, wireless, satellite), security requirements (e.g., classified networks), and the specific agency or branch of service. A preliminary search might reveal that this value falls within a common range for large-scale, multi-year engineering support contracts, but a definitive assessment requires access to a comprehensive database of federal contract spending and detailed scope comparisons.

What are the primary risks associated with the 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) contract type for this specific network engineering project?

The primary risk associated with the CPFF contract type for this network engineering project is the potential for cost escalation. While the 'fixed fee' provides a defined profit margin for the contractor, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor's allowable costs. This can incentivize the contractor to incur higher costs, as their fee remains constant regardless of the total project cost. For the government, this translates to a risk of paying more than anticipated if costs are not rigorously controlled and audited. Effective risk mitigation requires robust oversight, detailed cost accounting standards, clear definitions of allowable costs, and strong program management to ensure the contractor operates efficiently and within reasonable expenditure parameters.

How effective has the 'Full and Open Competition' process been in ensuring competitive pricing for this contract, given its duration and scope?

The 'Full and Open Competition' process is designed to maximize competition and thereby achieve the best possible pricing. For a contract of this nature (engineering services, $17.5M over 4 years), this process likely attracted multiple bidders, leading to a more competitive bidding environment. The effectiveness in ensuring competitive pricing hinges on the clarity of the solicitation, the realism of the requirements, and the number and capability of the bidding firms. While the data confirms the *process* used, it doesn't inherently guarantee optimal pricing without further analysis of the bids received and the final negotiated price relative to independent cost estimates. However, this method is generally considered the most effective for achieving fair market value.

What are the potential performance challenges or indicators of success for a 4-year network engineering contract of this magnitude?

Potential performance challenges for a 4-year network engineering contract include adapting to evolving technologies, managing scope creep, ensuring consistent service quality over the contract's lifespan, and maintaining effective communication between the contractor and government stakeholders. Indicators of success would include the successful deployment and integration of network systems, achievement of key performance metrics (e.g., uptime, bandwidth, latency), timely completion of milestones, adherence to security protocols, and positive feedback from end-users. The long duration also allows for assessing the contractor's ability to manage long-term sustainment and upgrade requirements effectively, contributing to the overall modernization goals of the Department of the Army.

How does this contract fit into the broader landscape of federal spending on engineering and IT services for national defense?

This $17.5 million contract for network engineering services represents a component of the broader federal spending on engineering and IT services for national defense, which collectively amounts to billions of dollars annually. Such contracts are critical for maintaining and upgrading the complex technological infrastructure required by modern military operations. They support everything from secure communication networks and data management systems to advanced simulation and training environments. This specific contract's focus on network support aligns with the DoD's ongoing efforts to enhance command, control, and communications (C3) capabilities, ensuring interoperability and resilience across various platforms and geographic locations. Its value, while substantial, is likely one among many similar investments aimed at modernizing defense IT infrastructure.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › General Science and Technology R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W91CRB09R0084

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12821 OLD FORT RD STE 302, FORT WASHINGTON, MD, 04

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Federally Funded Research and Development Corp, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,792,809

Exercised Options: $17,792,809

Current Obligation: $17,449,299

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline