DoD's $43.2M Intelligence Services Contract Awarded to Engility Corporation in 2007
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $43,224,511 ($43.2M)
Contractor: Engility Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2007-01-31
End Date: 2007-06-30
Contract Duration: 150 days
Daily Burn Rate: $288.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS
Sector: Other
Official Description: INTELLIGENCE SERVICES, IRAQ
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $43.2 million to ENGILITY CORPORATION for work described as: INTELLIGENCE SERVICES, IRAQ Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract was for intelligence services in Iraq, indicating a focus on national security operations. 3. Awarded to Engility Corporation, a significant player in government contracting. 4. The contract duration was 150 days, suggesting a short-term, specific need. 5. The contract type was Time and Materials, which can carry cost risks if not managed closely. 6. The base contract value was $28.8M, with potential for growth.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's value of $43.2M for a 150-day period for intelligence services in Iraq is substantial. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data for similar services in that operational environment, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, can lead to higher costs if not tightly controlled, especially in a high-risk, dynamic environment like Iraq. Benchmarking against other intelligence support contracts in similar theaters would be necessary for a more definitive assessment of pricing fairness.
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. The presence of 5 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition for this requirement. A competitive process generally helps in achieving fair market prices and encourages contractors to offer their best value propositions. The specific details of the bidding process and the evaluation criteria would provide further insight into the effectiveness of the competition.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible price and quality through a wide range of offers, preventing potential price gouging.
Public Impact
Beneficiaries include the Department of Defense and military personnel operating in Iraq. Services delivered likely supported intelligence gathering, analysis, and dissemination crucial for operational planning and execution. Geographic impact is concentrated in Iraq, directly supporting U.S. military operations there. Workforce implications involve skilled personnel, likely with security clearances, providing specialized intelligence expertise.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not diligently managed.
- The short duration (150 days) might indicate a reactive need, potentially leading to less optimal planning and pricing.
- Operating in Iraq presents inherent security and logistical risks that could impact contract performance and cost.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
- Multiple bidders (5) indicate a competitive market for these services.
- The contract supports critical national security intelligence functions.
Sector Analysis
The intelligence services sector within government contracting is highly specialized, often involving sensitive information and requiring cleared personnel. This contract falls under professional, scientific, and technical services. The market size for such services is significant, driven by ongoing national security needs. Engility Corporation, as the awardee, is a known entity in this space. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within broader intelligence community budgets and specific operational support contracts.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or performance related to small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific award is likely minimal, unless Engility Corporation voluntarily engaged small businesses as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management structures. Accountability measures would be tied to the performance requirements outlined in the contract statement of work. Transparency is generally limited for intelligence-related contracts due to national security sensitivities. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.
Related Government Programs
- Intelligence Support Services
- Department of Defense Contracts
- Services in Support of Operations in Iraq
- Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Risk Flags
- Time and Materials contract type
- Operation in a high-risk environment (Iraq)
- Short contract duration
Tags
intelligence-services, department-of-defense, iraq, full-and-open-competition, time-and-materials, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, army, national-security
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $43.2 million to ENGILITY CORPORATION. INTELLIGENCE SERVICES, IRAQ
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is ENGILITY CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $43.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-01-31. End: 2007-06-30.
What was Engility Corporation's track record with similar intelligence support contracts prior to this award?
Engility Corporation, prior to and during the period this contract was active, was a significant government contractor with a substantial portfolio. While specific details on their track record with intelligence support contracts prior to this particular award in 2007 are not detailed in the provided data, the company was known for providing a range of services to defense and intelligence agencies. Their history would likely include experience in areas such as systems engineering, IT support, and mission support. A deeper dive into their contract history with agencies like the DoD, DIA, or NGA would reveal their performance trends, past issues, and successes in delivering complex services, which would provide context for this specific $43.2M award.
How does the $43.2M value compare to similar intelligence services contracts awarded during the 2007 timeframe?
The $43.2M value for a 150-day intelligence services contract in Iraq during 2007 is substantial, reflecting the high operational tempo and critical needs of the period. To benchmark this value, one would need to compare it against other contracts for similar intelligence support, analysis, or operational support services awarded by the Department of Defense or other intelligence agencies during that fiscal year. Contracts supporting operations in theaters like Iraq or Afghanistan often commanded premium pricing due to the inherent risks, logistical complexities, and specialized skill sets required. Without access to a broader dataset of comparable contracts, it's difficult to definitively state if this represented a high, low, or average value, but the scale suggests a significant requirement.
What were the primary risks associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?
The primary risks associated with this contract likely included operational security, personnel safety in a hostile environment (Iraq), potential for scope creep given the dynamic nature of intelligence needs, and cost overruns due to the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure. Mitigation strategies would typically involve robust security protocols for personnel and information, clear performance work statements (PWS), stringent oversight by contracting officers and CORs, regular reporting requirements, and potentially cost ceilings or fixed-price components for certain deliverables. The short 150-day duration might have been a strategy to limit exposure to long-term risks. Effective risk mitigation would depend heavily on the contractor's and the government's program management capabilities.
What was the overall effectiveness of the intelligence services provided under this contract?
The provided data does not contain information on the effectiveness of the intelligence services delivered under this contract. Effectiveness would typically be measured through performance metrics outlined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS), feedback from end-users (e.g., military commanders), and post-contract reviews. Given the sensitive nature of intelligence operations, detailed effectiveness reports are often classified. However, the fact that the contract was awarded and presumably executed suggests a perceived need and likely a level of operational utility, but a definitive assessment of its success requires access to performance evaluations and mission outcomes.
How has federal spending on intelligence services evolved since this contract was awarded in 2007?
Federal spending on intelligence services has generally increased significantly since 2007, driven by evolving global threats, technological advancements, and a greater emphasis on data analytics and cyber intelligence. While specific figures fluctuate annually based on budget appropriations and national security priorities, the overall trend has been upward. The landscape has also shifted towards more integrated intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, increased use of unmanned systems, and a greater focus on open-source intelligence (OSINT) and cyber operations. Contracts like this one, focused on specific geographic support, are part of a larger, more complex, and often more technologically advanced intelligence enterprise today.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 008898843)
Address: 3750 CENTERVIEW DR, CHANTILLY, VA, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $43,224,511
Exercised Options: $43,224,511
Current Obligation: $43,224,511
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W912CM05D0011
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-01-31
Current End Date: 2007-06-30
Potential End Date: 2007-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2007-12-12
More Contracts from Engility Corporation
- IT Support for Network Operation and Security Center for Usafcent — $150.8M (General Services Administration)
- [piin: W912cm-05-D-0011-0011] Migrated Award & Mods UP to 0005 — $121.9M (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $113.5M (Department of Defense)
- 200303!000021!1700!A8305 !naval AIR Warfare Center Trainin!n6133900d0032 !A!N! !N!0003 !20021203!20040614!177153319!008898884!008898843!N!L-3 Communications Government !3750 Centerview Drive !chantilly !va!20151!03000!013!51!arlington !arlington !virginia !+000039861464!n!n!000000000000!6930!operational Training Devices !c9e!all Other Supplies and Equipme!2afx!f-18 Hornet !333319!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !n!z!a!u!m!2!002!b! !Z!N!F! ! !n!b!y!n! ! !Z! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $91.3M (Department of Defense)
- 200208!000084!5700!GV68 !esc/Ack !gs35f5396h !C!N! !N!F1962802F8162 !20020409!20040131!081080707!011147928!048341838!n!the Titan Corporation !1900 Campus Commons Drive !reston !va!20191!01375!037!24!andover Estates !ST. Mary S !maryland !+000011005449!n!n!000000000000!r499!other Professional Services !A7 !electronics and Communication !3000!NOT Discernable or Classified !334290!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !y!c!n!n! ! ! ! ! ! !* ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $86.3M (Department of Defense)
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)