DoD's $28.3M engineering services contract with J.F. Taylor, Inc. awarded via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,367,942 ($28.4M)

Contractor: J.F. Taylor, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-06-08

End Date: 2007-08-22

Contract Duration: 1,170 days

Daily Burn Rate: $24.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200409!000385!1700!A8104 !NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER, AIRCRA!N0042102D3179 !A!N! !Y!0005 !04 !20040608!20050425!114358625!114358625!114358625!N!J F TAYLOR, INC !21610 SOUTH ESSEX DRIVE !LEXINGTON PARK !MD!20653!46725!037!24!LEXINGTON PARK !ST. MARY S !MARYLAND !-000000042000!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!S!D! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!Y!U!2!002!B! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!B!A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: LEXINGTON PARK, ST. MARY'S County, MARYLAND, 20653

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $28.4 million to J.F. TAYLOR, INC. for work described as: 200409!000385!1700!A8104 !NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER, AIRCRA!N0042102D3179 !A!N! !Y!0005 !04 !20040608!20050425!114358625!114358625!114358625!N!J F TAYLOR, INC !21610 SOUTH ESSEX DRIVE !LEXINGTON PARK !MD!20653!46725!037!24!LEXINGTON PARK !ST. … Key points: 1. Contract awarded for engineering technical services, indicating a need for specialized expertise. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to better pricing. 3. The contract duration of 1170 days (over 3 years) points to a significant, long-term requirement. 4. Awarded by the Naval Air Warfare Center, highlighting its importance within naval aviation research and development. 5. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' contract type suggests potential for cost overruns if not closely managed. 6. The contractor, J.F. Taylor, Inc., has a track record with this specific contract, implying prior performance. 7. The contract falls under Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (NAICS 541710).

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount is $28,367,942.36. Without specific benchmarks for 'Engineering Technical Services' within naval aviation R&D, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) contract type, while allowing flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not meticulously managed. The contract's duration and the number of modifications (8) suggest ongoing adjustments and potential scope creep, which warrants scrutiny for cost efficiency.

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 a bid. The data does not specify the number of bidders, but this method generally fosters a competitive environment. A competitive process is expected to drive down prices and encourage innovation as contractors vie for the award. The absence of specific bidder numbers prevents a deeper analysis of the degree of competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining services at a competitive market price, maximizing the value of federal dollars spent.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Defense and specifically the Naval Air Warfare Center, which receives critical engineering and technical support. The services delivered are engineering and technical support, crucial for the development, testing, and maintenance of naval aircraft and related systems. The geographic impact is centered around Lexington Park, Maryland, where the contractor J.F. Taylor, Inc. is located, potentially supporting local employment and the regional economy. Workforce implications include the employment of engineers, technicians, and support staff by J.F. Taylor, Inc. to fulfill the contract requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) contract type carries inherent risks of cost overruns if not managed diligently, potentially exceeding initial estimates.
With 8 modifications, there's a potential for scope creep, which could increase the overall cost and duration beyond the original intent.
Lack of specific performance metrics or quality indicators in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's performance objectively.
The contract's significant value and duration necessitate robust oversight to ensure continued value for money and adherence to requirements.

Positive Signals

Awarded through 'Full and Open Competition,' suggesting a competitive process that should yield fair pricing.
The contractor, J.F. Taylor, Inc., has been awarded this contract, implying they met the necessary qualifications and performance standards.
The contract is for essential engineering and technical services vital to naval aviation R&D, indicating a strategic need being met.
The duration of the contract (over 3 years) suggests a stable, long-term relationship that can foster expertise and efficiency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences sector (NAICS 541710). This sector is critical for innovation and technological advancement within the defense industry. Spending in this area often involves complex projects requiring specialized expertise. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within other large-scale engineering and R&D contracts awarded by defense agencies for similar services, often in the millions to tens of millions of dollars range.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates 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 provision. However, the prime contractor, J.F. Taylor, Inc., may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall business strategy, but this is not mandated by the contract's award terms.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management structures, likely managed by the Naval Air Warfare Center and potentially the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). Accountability measures would include adherence to the contract terms, delivery of services, and financial reporting. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Contracts
Department of Defense Research and Development Contracts
Engineering Services Contracts
Aerospace Engineering Support
Naval Aviation Technology Development
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type risk
Potential for scope creep due to contract modifications
Lack of detailed performance metrics
Need for ongoing cost oversight

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $28.4 million to J.F. TAYLOR, INC.. 200409!000385!1700!A8104 !NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER, AIRCRA!N0042102D3179 !A!N! !Y!0005 !04 !20040608!20050425!114358625!114358625!114358625!N!J F TAYLOR, INC !21610 SOUTH ESSEX DRIVE !LEXINGTON PARK !MD!20653!46725!037!24!LEXINGTON PARK !ST. MARY S !MARYLAND !-000000042000!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!S!D! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J.F. TAYLOR, 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 $28.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-06-08. End: 2007-08-22.

What is the track record of J.F. Taylor, Inc. with the Department of Defense, particularly in similar engineering services contracts?

J.F. Taylor, Inc. has a history of contracting with the Department of Defense, as evidenced by this specific award. To fully assess their track record, a broader analysis of their past performance on similar contracts would be necessary. This would involve examining the number of previous DoD contracts, their values, the types of services rendered, and any reported performance issues or successes. Without access to a comprehensive contract history database or performance reviews, it's difficult to provide a detailed assessment beyond this single contract. However, being awarded a multi-million dollar, multi-year contract suggests a level of capability and trust from the awarding agency.

How does the value of this contract compare to similar engineering technical services contracts awarded by the Navy or DoD?

The total award value of $28.3 million for engineering technical services is substantial, placing it in the mid-to-high range for individual service contracts. Benchmarking requires comparing it to contracts with similar scope, duration, and complexity within the naval aviation or broader DoD R&D sectors. Contracts for specialized engineering support, particularly those involving advanced technology development or system integration for aircraft, can easily reach tens of millions of dollars. Without specific comparable contract data (e.g., similar NAICS codes, agencies, and service descriptions), it's challenging to definitively state if this represents excellent, fair, or questionable value. However, the duration (over 3 years) and the nature of R&D services suggest the price point is within a plausible range for such specialized work.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Cost Plus Fixed Fee' (CPFF) contract of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risk with a CPFF contract is the potential for cost overruns. While the 'fixed fee' component provides some predictability for the contractor's profit, the 'cost plus' element means the government pays the actual allowable costs incurred by the contractor, plus that fixed fee. If the contractor's costs exceed projections due to inefficiencies, unforeseen technical challenges, or scope creep, the total price paid by the government can escalate significantly. For a contract of this size ($28.3M) and duration (over 3 years), diligent oversight is crucial to monitor costs, ensure efficiency, and prevent unnecessary expenditures. The government must have robust mechanisms to audit costs and ensure they are reasonable, allocable, and allowable.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition' process likely to be in ensuring optimal value for this specific R&D contract?

Full and Open Competition is generally the most effective method for ensuring optimal value, as it allows the widest possible pool of potential contractors to compete. This competition drives innovation and price reductions. For R&D services, where technical approach and expertise are paramount, a broad competition allows the government to evaluate diverse solutions and select the most capable offeror at a competitive price. The effectiveness hinges on the clarity of the solicitation requirements and the rigor of the evaluation process. While the data confirms the competition type, the number of bidders and the specific evaluation criteria would further inform the assessment of its effectiveness in achieving optimal value for this particular contract.

What are the potential implications of the 8 contract modifications on the overall cost and scope?

The presence of 8 contract modifications over the life of this contract (which had an initial duration of 1170 days, approximately 3.2 years) suggests that the scope of work likely evolved after the initial award. Modifications can be necessary for legitimate reasons, such as incorporating new technological requirements, addressing unforeseen technical challenges, or adjusting timelines. However, a high number of modifications can also indicate potential issues with the initial scope definition, planning, or execution. Each modification needs careful review to ensure it aligns with the overall program objectives and provides continued value for money. Without details on the nature of these modifications, it's difficult to definitively assess their impact, but they warrant scrutiny for potential scope creep and cost increases.

What is the significance of the NAICS code 541710 (Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences) for this contract?

The NAICS code 541710 signifies that this contract is focused on scientific inquiry and experimentation aimed at discovering or interpreting facts, principles, or theories for application to practical uses. For this contract with the Naval Air Warfare Center, it implies the work involves advanced engineering and physical sciences research related to naval aviation. This sector typically involves high-skill labor, significant investment in equipment and facilities, and often carries inherent risks associated with R&D projects. Contracts under this code are crucial for maintaining technological superiority and developing next-generation capabilities for the military.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Contractor Details

Address: 21610 S ESSEX DR, LEXINGTON PARK, MD, 05

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0042102D3179

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline