Transportation Department awards $22.8M contract for airport traffic management, with 3 bidders competing

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,793,216 ($22.8M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2014-09-24

End Date: 2017-12-07

Contract Duration: 1,170 days

Daily Burn Rate: $19.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Transportation

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF INITIAL AIRPORT SURFACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TASKS

Place of Performance

Location: BILLERICA, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01821

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $22.8 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF INITIAL AIRPORT SURFACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TASKS Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the duration and scope of consulting services. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for these specialized services. 3. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure warrants scrutiny for potential cost overruns. 4. Performance period spans over three years, indicating a significant project. 5. This contract falls within the broader category of scientific and technical consulting. 6. The award was a delivery order against an existing contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $22.8 million over nearly four years (September 2014 to December 2017) for airport surface traffic management tasks appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized consulting services. Benchmarking against similar contracts is challenging without more specific details on the exact tasks performed, but the duration and the nature of the work suggest a substantial effort. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) pricing structure, while common, requires careful monitoring to ensure costs remain controlled and the fixed fee remains appropriate for the services rendered.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors were eligible to bid. The presence of three bidders suggests a competitive environment for these specialized airport surface traffic management services. A competitive process like this generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition ensures that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by leveraging market forces to obtain the best value. It reduces the risk of overpayment and encourages contractors to offer competitive pricing.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Transportation, specifically the Immediate Office of the Secretary, in enhancing airport surface traffic management. The services delivered likely involve research, analysis, and recommendations to improve the efficiency and safety of airport operations. The geographic impact is likely national, focusing on improvements applicable to various airports within the United States. The contract supports a specialized segment of the consulting workforce focused on aviation and transportation logistics.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts can incentivize higher spending if not closely managed.
The duration of the contract (over 3 years) increases the risk of scope creep or evolving requirements.
Reliance on a single delivery order against a contract vehicle may limit long-term strategic planning visibility.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
The contract addresses a critical area of transportation infrastructure management.
The fixed fee component provides some cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on management and technical consulting related to transportation and aviation. The market for such services is driven by government needs for expertise in complex operational areas like air traffic control and airport efficiency. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within the broader category of 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' (NAICS code 541690), where government agencies procure specialized knowledge to address unique challenges.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there information suggesting significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The primary contractor, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), is a large business. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific award is likely minimal, unless SAIC actively engages small businesses for specialized support.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Transportation's contracting officer and program managers. As a delivery order against an existing contract vehicle, initial oversight might have been established during the parent contract's award. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Control Modernization
Department of Transportation Research and Development Programs
Airport Improvement Grants
Aviation Security Services

Risk Flags

Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee structure requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
Potential for scope creep over the contract's multi-year duration.
Effectiveness depends on agency's implementation of recommendations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $22.8 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. IGF::OT::IGF INITIAL AIRPORT SURFACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TASKS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-09-24. End: 2017-12-07.

What specific tasks and deliverables were included under this contract for airport surface traffic management?

The provided data does not detail the specific tasks and deliverables. However, 'Airport Surface Traffic Management Tasks' suggests work related to optimizing the movement of aircraft and vehicles on the ground at airports. This could include analysis of current procedures, development of new strategies, simulation modeling, technology assessments, and recommendations for improving safety, efficiency, and capacity. Deliverables would likely include reports, studies, presentations, and potentially software prototypes or system designs, all aimed at enhancing the operational flow on airport tarmacs and taxiways.

How does the $22.8 million contract value compare to similar airport traffic management consulting contracts?

Direct comparison is difficult without knowing the precise scope, duration, and specific services rendered. However, $22.8 million over approximately 3.3 years (from late 2014 to late 2017) averages around $6.9 million per year. This figure seems reasonable for specialized consulting services in a critical infrastructure sector like aviation. Larger, more complex projects involving system-wide implementation or major technological overhauls could easily exceed this amount, while smaller, focused studies might cost significantly less. The fact that it was competed suggests the value was deemed appropriate by the market.

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

The primary risk with a CPFF contract is that the contractor may have less incentive to control costs compared to a fixed-price contract, as the government agrees to pay all allowable costs plus a negotiated fixed fee. If the government's oversight is insufficient, costs could escalate beyond initial expectations. For airport traffic management consulting, risks include scope creep, where the project expands beyond its original definition, leading to increased costs. Additionally, defining 'allowable costs' and ensuring the fixed fee accurately reflects the effort and risk involved requires careful negotiation and ongoing monitoring by the contracting agency.

What was the historical spending pattern for airport surface traffic management consulting services by the Department of Transportation prior to this award?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns. To assess this, one would need to analyze past contracts awarded by the Department of Transportation (and potentially the FAA) for similar services. This would involve searching contract databases for keywords related to 'airport surface traffic management,' 'airside operations consulting,' or similar terms, and examining spending levels, contract durations, and competition types over several fiscal years. Understanding historical spending helps establish a baseline for evaluating the reasonableness of the current contract's value.

What is the track record of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) in performing similar government contracts?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has a long history of performing a wide range of complex technical, engineering, and IT services for various U.S. government agencies, including the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security. While this specific contract was for the Department of Transportation, SAIC's extensive experience in large-scale government contracting suggests they possess the capability to manage and execute projects of this nature. Their track record generally includes successful delivery on complex programs, though like any large contractor, specific contract performance can vary. A deeper dive into their past performance ratings on similar DOT or aviation-related contracts would provide more granular insights.

How effective are consulting contracts like this in improving actual airport surface traffic management operations?

The effectiveness of consulting contracts hinges on several factors: the clarity of the problem statement, the quality of the analysis and recommendations provided by the contractor, and crucially, the agency's commitment and capability to implement the proposed solutions. Contracts focused on analysis and recommendations (like this one likely was) provide valuable insights and potential pathways for improvement. However, their ultimate impact depends on whether the Department of Transportation acts upon these findings, allocates resources for implementation, and integrates the changes into operational practices. Without evidence of implementation and subsequent measured improvements in efficiency or safety, the effectiveness remains potential rather than proven.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services

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

Offers Received: 3

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,283,803

Exercised Options: $23,283,803

Current Obligation: $22,793,216

Actual Outlays: $-43,147

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTRT5712D30003

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline