DoD's $78M IGF Engineering Support Contract Awarded to Parsons Government Services Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $78,313,933 ($78.3M)

Contractor: Parsons Government Services Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-05-15

End Date: 2016-08-28

Contract Duration: 836 days

Daily Burn Rate: $93.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF ENGINEERING SUPPORT CAPABILITY, DT-01-14, FLIGHT TEST

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $78.3 million to PARSONS GOVERNMENT SERVICES INC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF ENGINEERING SUPPORT CAPABILITY, DT-01-14, FLIGHT TEST Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 3. The duration of the contract is 836 days, indicating a medium-term engagement. 4. The contract was awarded as a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 5. The Missile Defense Agency is the primary customer, focusing on research and development. 6. The contract is geographically located in Alabama. 7. The contract's North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 541712, related to R&D in physical sciences.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $78.3 million over approximately two years for engineering support in R&D is substantial. Without specific performance metrics or benchmarks for similar R&D engineering support contracts, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. The CPFF contract type introduces inherent risk regarding cost control, as contractor profit is tied to costs incurred. Further analysis would require comparing the final cost to the initial estimate and evaluating the delivered technical outcomes against the contract's objectives.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The data shows two bids were received. While 'full and open' is the preferred method for maximizing competition, the low number of bids (two) might suggest limitations in the market for this specific type of specialized engineering support or potential barriers to entry for other firms. This level of competition could impact price negotiation and the ultimate value achieved.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging lower prices and better service offerings. However, with only two bids, the potential for significant cost savings may have been constrained compared to a scenario with numerous competing proposals.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and specifically the Missile Defense Agency, receiving specialized engineering support for flight testing. The services delivered are critical for the research and development phase of missile defense systems. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alabama, where the contract work is performed. The contract supports a specialized workforce in engineering and R&D fields within the aerospace and defense sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can incentivize cost overruns if not rigorously monitored.
Low number of bids (2) in a full and open competition may indicate limited market competition or high barriers to entry.
The contract duration of 836 days requires sustained oversight to ensure performance and cost control.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, maximizing the pool of potential offerors.
The contract supports critical research and development for national defense.
The Missile Defense Agency's focus suggests a strategic investment in advanced capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on engineering support for physical and engineering sciences. The aerospace and defense industry, where missile defense R&D is prominent, is characterized by high technological complexity and significant government investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within other large-scale defense R&D contracts, often involving specialized engineering services, system integration, and testing. The market size for such specialized R&D support is substantial, driven by ongoing defense modernization efforts.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a small business set-aside. Large prime contractors are typically expected to have their own small business subcontracting plans, but this information is not detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the contracting officer and the Missile Defense Agency's program management office. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, rigorous financial oversight and performance monitoring are crucial to manage costs and ensure deliverables meet requirements. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms, though specific details on public access to performance data are not provided. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Aerospace Engineering Services
Defense Research and Development Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Vehicles

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF contract type.
Limited competition indicated by only two bids received.
Need for robust oversight to manage performance and costs over the contract duration.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $78.3 million to PARSONS GOVERNMENT SERVICES INC. IGF::CT::IGF ENGINEERING SUPPORT CAPABILITY, DT-01-14, FLIGHT TEST

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PARSONS GOVERNMENT SERVICES INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $78.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-05-15. End: 2016-08-28.

What is the historical spending pattern for IGF Engineering Support Capability contracts awarded by the Missile Defense Agency?

Analyzing historical spending for 'IGF Engineering Support Capability' contracts requires accessing broader contract databases beyond this single award. However, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) consistently invests heavily in research, development, and testing of missile defense systems. Contracts for engineering support, particularly for flight testing and system integration, are recurring needs. Past awards likely show a pattern of multi-year, high-value contracts awarded to established defense contractors. The specific nature of 'IGF' suggests a program or capability area that has likely seen sustained funding. Without access to historical MDA procurement data, it's difficult to provide precise figures, but the agency's mission implies continuous, significant expenditure in this domain.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type compare to other contract types for similar R&D engineering services in terms of cost efficiency?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common in R&D where the scope of work is not precisely defined, and innovation is key. The contractor is reimbursed for actual costs plus a fixed fee representing profit. While this allows flexibility for evolving R&D needs, it carries a risk of cost overruns if the contractor's costs escalate beyond initial projections, as the fee remains fixed. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers less cost certainty for the government but greater flexibility for the contractor to adapt to unforeseen technical challenges. Cost-reimbursement contracts (like CPFF) are generally considered less cost-efficient than FFP when requirements are well-defined, as they shift more risk to the government. However, for exploratory R&D, they can be necessary to encourage innovation and manage technical uncertainty.

What is the typical number of bids received for specialized R&D engineering support contracts of this magnitude within the Department of Defense?

For specialized R&D engineering support contracts within the Department of Defense (DoD) of this magnitude (approximately $78 million), the number of bids can vary significantly. Contracts requiring highly specific technical expertise, advanced clearances, or proprietary knowledge may attract fewer bidders. While 'full and open competition' aims to maximize participation, the reality is that only a handful of companies may possess the requisite qualifications. Receiving two bids, as indicated for this contract, is not uncommon in such specialized fields. However, it is on the lower end of what might be considered robust competition. A higher number of bids (e.g., 4-6) would generally indicate a more competitive market and potentially better price discovery for the government.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically used to evaluate the success of engineering support contracts for flight testing in missile defense?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for engineering support contracts related to missile defense flight testing often focus on technical execution, schedule adherence, and cost control. Examples include: successful completion of test objectives within planned parameters, accuracy and reliability of data collection and analysis, timely delivery of engineering reports and recommendations, adherence to safety protocols during testing, and management of contractor-provided resources (personnel, equipment). Cost efficiency, measured by comparing actual costs against budgeted amounts for specific tasks, is also critical. Furthermore, the contractor's ability to identify and resolve technical issues encountered during testing, and their responsiveness to government feedback, are vital qualitative KPIs.

What is the track record of Parsons Government Services Inc. in delivering similar engineering support contracts for the Missile Defense Agency or other DoD entities?

Parsons Government Services Inc. has a significant track record in providing engineering, technical, and program management services to various U.S. government agencies, including the Department of Defense (DoD) and NASA. They have been involved in complex projects related to aerospace, defense systems, infrastructure, and cybersecurity. For the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) specifically, Parsons has historically secured contracts involving systems engineering, integration, testing, and sustainment support for missile defense programs. Their experience often spans the lifecycle of defense systems, from R&D through deployment and operations. A detailed review of their contract history with the MDA would reveal specific projects, performance ratings, and any past issues, but generally, they are considered a major incumbent contractor in this space.

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

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: HQ014709R0002

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Parsons Corporation

Address: 25531 COMMERCENTRE DR STE 120, LAKE FOREST, CA, 92630

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $88,337,619

Exercised Options: $88,337,619

Current Obligation: $78,313,933

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HQ014710D0010

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline