Naval Surface Warfare Center contract for training services awarded at $85.1M, with a significant portion for engineering services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $57,850,354 ($57.9M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-06-16

End Date: 2024-01-25

Contract Duration: 6,797 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200510!059797!1700!N00178!NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER !N0017804D4119 !A!N! !Y!0015 ! !20050616!20060615!072581718!072581718!054781240!N!AMSEC LLC !2829 GUARDIAN LANE !VIRGINIA BEACH !VA!23452!82000!810!51!VIRGINIA BEACH !VIRGINIA BEACH (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000000236686!N!N!000000000000!U008!TRAINING/CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20090331!B! ! !A! !A!N!U!2!021!B! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! !1700!N00178!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ANDOVER, ESSEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01810

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $57.9 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: 200510!059797!1700!N00178!NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER !N0017804D4119 !A!N! !Y!0015 ! !20050616!20060615!072581718!072581718!054781240!N!AMSEC LLC !2829 GUARDIAN LANE !VIRGINIA BEACH !VA!23452!82000!810!51!VIRGINIA BEACH !VIRG… Key points: 1. Contract value of $85.1M indicates substantial investment in specialized training and curriculum development. 2. Engineering services (NAICS 541330) represent a significant portion, suggesting complex technical training needs. 3. The contract's duration of nearly 19 years (from 2005 to 2024) points to long-term, evolving requirements. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, implying a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing. 5. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) suggests that costs were not precisely known at the outset, requiring careful oversight. 6. The presence of multiple delivery orders (21) indicates flexibility and phased execution of services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $85.1M for training and curriculum development over an extended period appears reasonable given the scope of engineering services involved. Benchmarking against similar long-term, complex training contracts for defense agencies would provide further context. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, while common for evolving requirements, necessitates diligent cost monitoring to ensure value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The fact that it resulted in 21 delivery orders over its lifespan indicates a sustained need met through a competitive process. This level of competition generally fosters price discovery and encourages vendors to offer competitive terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best value for the required training and engineering services, preventing potential overpricing that might occur in less competitive scenarios.

Public Impact

Naval personnel benefit from specialized training and curriculum development, enhancing operational readiness and technical proficiency. The services delivered likely support the maintenance, operation, and modernization of naval systems and platforms. Geographic impact is concentrated around Naval Surface Warfare Center locations, particularly Virginia Beach, VA. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled instructors, curriculum developers, and engineering support staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
Long contract durations may not always reflect the most current technological needs without regular re-evaluation.
Reliance on a single primary contractor (AMSEC LLC) for an extended period could limit exposure to newer market entrants.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a healthy market for these services.
Multiple delivery orders suggest adaptability to evolving naval requirements.
The contract's longevity points to consistent performance and satisfaction with the services provided.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically engineering services and training. The defense sector heavily relies on such specialized services to maintain its technological edge and operational readiness. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large-scale training and simulation contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other military branches.

Small Business Impact

While the primary contractor is AMSEC LLC, the contract details do not explicitly indicate a small business set-aside. However, the nature of large, complex defense contracts often involves significant subcontracting opportunities. It is possible that small businesses could be engaged as subcontractors for specialized components of the training or engineering services, contributing to the broader small business ecosystem within the defense industry.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Naval Surface Warfare Center and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). Accountability measures would include performance reviews, milestone tracking, and financial audits, especially given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases and reporting requirements, though specific details of performance metrics may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Naval Training and Readiness Programs
Defense Engineering Services Contracts
Curriculum Development Services
Naval Surface Warfare Center Operations Support
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
Long contract duration may require periodic re-evaluation of scope and pricing.
Potential for contractor performance drift over an extended period.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $57.9 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. 200510!059797!1700!N00178!NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER !N0017804D4119 !A!N! !Y!0015 ! !20050616!20060615!072581718!072581718!054781240!N!AMSEC LLC !2829 GUARDIAN LANE !VIRGINIA BEACH !VA!23452!82000!810!51!VIRGINIA BEACH !VIRGINIA BEACH (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000000236686!N!N!000000000000!U008!TRAINING/CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!200

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $57.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-06-16. End: 2024-01-25.

What was the specific performance history of AMSEC LLC on this contract?

AMSEC LLC, the primary contractor, has a long history of supporting naval training and technical services. On this specific contract (N0017804D4119), the data indicates a sustained relationship from 2005 to 2024, involving 21 delivery orders totaling $85.1M. While the raw data doesn't detail specific performance metrics like on-time delivery or quality ratings, the repeated issuance of delivery orders and the contract's longevity suggest a generally satisfactory performance history. Further analysis would require access to performance reports, contractor feedback, and any documented issues or commendations during the contract's extensive period of execution.

How does the $85.1M award compare to similar naval training contracts?

The $85.1M award for training and curriculum development, encompassing engineering services over nearly two decades, represents a significant investment. To benchmark this value, one would compare it against other large-scale, long-duration training and simulation contracts awarded by the Navy or other Department of Defense branches for comparable systems or operational needs. Factors such as the complexity of the training, the number of personnel trained, and the technological sophistication of the curriculum would influence comparisons. Without specific comparable contract data, it's challenging to definitively state if $85.1M is high or low, but it signifies a substantial commitment to specialized naval expertise development.

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

The primary risks associated with a CPFF contract of this magnitude ($85.1M) and duration (nearly 19 years) revolve around cost control and potential for contractor inefficiency. CPFF contracts are used when costs cannot be easily estimated upfront. The risk for the government is that the contractor may incur higher costs than necessary, as their profit is fixed regardless of the final cost. This necessitates robust government oversight to scrutinize costs, ensure efficiency, and prevent scope creep. For a long-duration contract, the risk of the fixed fee becoming disproportionately large compared to the effort, or the contractor's incentives misaligning with evolving government needs over time, also increases.

How effective has this contract been in delivering advanced training to naval personnel?

The effectiveness of this contract in delivering advanced training is suggested by its longevity and the multiple delivery orders issued. The sustained engagement with AMSEC LLC from 2005 to 2024 implies that the services provided met the evolving needs of the Naval Surface Warfare Center. The inclusion of engineering services within the scope indicates that the training likely covered complex technical areas crucial for naval operations. However, a definitive assessment of effectiveness would require specific performance metrics, feedback from naval personnel who received the training, and an evaluation of how the acquired skills contributed to mission readiness and operational success.

What are the historical spending patterns for training and engineering services at the Naval Surface Warfare Center?

This specific contract (N0017804D4119) represents a significant historical spending pattern for training and engineering services at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, totaling $85.1M over nearly two decades. Analyzing broader historical spending would involve examining other contracts awarded by NSWC for similar services (NAICS 541330 - Engineering Services, and training-related codes) across different fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, and the primary contractors utilized. Such an analysis could indicate whether this contract was an outlier, part of a consistent investment strategy, or reflective of specific technological or operational shifts within the Navy.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010 SUNSET HILLS RD, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4119

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline