DoD's $20.9M contract for threat engineering support awarded to Axient LLC shows fair value with 4 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,904,469 ($20.9M)

Contractor: Axient LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-03-21

End Date: 2017-03-08

Contract Duration: 1,448 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: ENGINEERING SUPPORT CAPABILITY GROUP, DE-04, THREAT ENGINEERING

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.9 million to AXIENT LLC for work described as: ENGINEERING SUPPORT CAPABILITY GROUP, DE-04, THREAT ENGINEERING Key points: 1. Contract value of $20.9M over 4 years suggests a moderate annual spend. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a healthy market for specialized engineering services. 3. Risk indicators appear low given the established contractor and defined scope. 4. Performance context is within R&D for missile defense, a critical national security area. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader defense R&D landscape.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $20.9 million over approximately four years averages to about $5.2 million annually. This appears reasonable for specialized engineering support within the defense sector. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts for advanced engineering services suggests this pricing is competitive, especially considering the specific threat engineering focus. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type allows for cost flexibility while incentivizing the contractor to manage expenses within a defined fee structure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while competition was sought, certain sources were excluded. With four bidders participating, the competition level suggests a reasonably contested procurement, likely leading to fair price discovery. The exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to understand its impact on the breadth of competition and potential cost implications.

Taxpayer Impact: The presence of four bidders suggests that taxpayers benefited from a competitive process, likely resulting in a more favorable price than a sole-source award. However, the exclusion of certain sources could mean that taxpayers did not benefit from the absolute lowest possible price achievable in a completely open market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its agencies, specifically the Missile Defense Agency, receiving critical threat engineering support. Services delivered include research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences, focusing on threat analysis and engineering. The geographic impact is primarily within Alabama, where the contractor Axient LLC is located, potentially supporting local high-tech employment. Workforce implications include the employment of highly skilled engineers and researchers specializing in defense technologies.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Exclusion of Sources' clause in the competition type raises questions about the full extent of market engagement and potential missed opportunities for cost savings.
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while flexible, can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not meticulously managed and overseen.
The duration of the contract (over 4 years) requires sustained oversight to ensure continued value and alignment with evolving defense needs.

Positive Signals

Award to Axient LLC, an established entity, suggests a degree of confidence in their capabilities and past performance.
The participation of four bidders indicates a healthy level of interest and capability within the market for these specialized services.
The contract falls under Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences, a critical area for national security innovation.

Sector Analysis

This contract operates within the Defense Research and Development sector, a significant segment of the federal procurement landscape. The market for specialized engineering and threat analysis is driven by national security imperatives and technological advancements. Comparable spending benchmarks in this niche often involve multi-million dollar contracts for highly specialized R&D services, reflecting the complexity and criticality of the work. The Missile Defense Agency's focus on advanced technologies places this contract within a high-priority area of defense spending.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from set-aside provisions. The focus is on larger, established prime contractors capable of handling complex R&D requirements.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Missile Defense Agency. Accountability measures are inherent in the CPFF contract structure, requiring detailed reporting and justification of costs. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance metrics and detailed cost breakdowns may be less publicly accessible due to the sensitive nature of defense R&D. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Advanced Threat Analysis
Defense Research and Development Programs
Engineering Support Services
Department of Defense R&D Contracts

Risk Flags

Competition type includes exclusion of sources, potentially limiting full market competition.
CPFF contract type requires diligent oversight to manage cost risks.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.9 million to AXIENT LLC. ENGINEERING SUPPORT CAPABILITY GROUP, DE-04, THREAT ENGINEERING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AXIENT LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Missile Defense Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-03-21. End: 2017-03-08.

What is Axient LLC's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in R&D contracts?

Axient LLC has a history of performing work for the Department of Defense, including contracts related to research and development. Their experience often spans complex engineering, testing, and analysis services. While specific details of past performance on similar threat engineering contracts would require deeper database analysis, their selection for this significant award suggests a satisfactory track record. Further review of past performance evaluations and any documented issues would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and effectiveness in fulfilling DoD requirements.

How does the $20.9M contract value compare to similar threat engineering R&D contracts?

The $20.9 million contract value, spread over approximately four years, represents an average annual spend of around $5.2 million. This figure is moderate for specialized R&D within the defense sector. Comparable contracts for threat engineering, advanced simulation, and systems analysis can range significantly, from a few million to tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the scope, duration, and technological complexity. Given the specific focus on threat engineering for missile defense, this contract appears to be within a reasonable range, suggesting fair market value, especially considering the competitive nature of its award.

What are the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type revolve around cost control and potential for cost growth. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with an incentive to manage costs efficiently to maximize profit, the government bears the risk of actual allowable costs exceeding estimates. This necessitates robust oversight from the contracting agency to ensure that all costs incurred are reasonable, allocable, and necessary for contract performance. Without diligent monitoring, there is a risk that the total contract cost could escalate beyond initial projections, impacting the overall value for money.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in ensuring optimal value for taxpayers?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' aims to balance the benefits of broad competition with specific procurement needs or limitations. While it allows for more than one bidder, the exclusion of certain sources can limit the overall competitive pool. This may result in less downward pressure on pricing compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition. For taxpayers, the value is optimized when the remaining competitive field is robust enough to drive competitive pricing, and when the exclusions are justified by legitimate technical, security, or logistical reasons. The presence of four bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition, but the specific impact of the exclusions on the final price is a key consideration for value assessment.

What is the historical spending trend for threat engineering support within the Missile Defense Agency?

Analyzing historical spending trends for threat engineering support within the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) requires access to detailed procurement data over multiple fiscal years. Generally, spending in this area is driven by evolving threat landscapes and the need for advanced defensive capabilities. Contracts for such specialized R&D are often long-term and can fluctuate based on program priorities and technological advancements. Without specific historical data, it's difficult to establish a precise trend, but it's reasonable to assume consistent investment in threat engineering due to the critical nature of missile defense. This $20.9M award represents a significant, multi-year investment in this capability.

What are the implications of the contract being awarded in Alabama (st: AL, sn: ALABAMA)?

The contract being awarded to a contractor located in Alabama (st: AL, sn: ALABAMA) has several implications. Economically, it means that federal spending is directed towards the state's economy, potentially supporting local jobs, businesses, and the development of a skilled workforce in the aerospace and defense sectors. For the Missile Defense Agency, having a contractor located within the state might offer logistical advantages for site visits, collaboration, and oversight, depending on the proximity of agency facilities. It also contributes to the concentration of defense-related industry and expertise within Alabama.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: HQ014709R0001

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2231 CRYSTAL DR STE 711, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,686,802

Exercised Options: $24,686,802

Current Obligation: $20,904,469

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HQ014711D0007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline