DoD's $106M contract for systems engineering services awarded to Lear Siegler Services Inc. shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $106,036,902 ($106.0M)

Contractor: Amentum Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-08-02

End Date: 2009-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,885 days

Daily Burn Rate: $56.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 14

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200411!007779!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0703DB010 !A!N! !Y!0062 ! !20040802!20070130!073871048!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES INC !900 CLOPPER ROAD !GAITHERSBURG !MD!20878!31175!031!24!GAITHERSBURG !MONTGOMERY !MARYLAND !+000000500000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!Y!2!014!B! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !C!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: GERMANTOWN, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20876

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $106.0 million to AMENTUM SERVICES, INC. for work described as: 200411!007779!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0703DB010 !A!N! !Y!0062 ! !20040802!20070130!073871048!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES INC !900 CLOPPER ROAD !GAITHERSBURG !MD!20878!31175!031!24!GAITHERSBURG !MONTGOMERY !MARYLAND !+000000500000!N!N!000000… Key points: 1. The contract's value of $106 million over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in specialized engineering expertise. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open process, which typically fosters competitive pricing and broader market engagement. 3. Risk indicators are low, with no apparent red flags in contract type or performance history provided. 4. Performance context is established through a multi-year duration, allowing for sustained support and development. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader defense and aerospace R&D landscape, focusing on critical electronic systems.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $106 million over approximately 5 years (August 2004 to September 2009) averages to about $21.2 million per year. Without specific benchmarks for similar systems engineering contracts within the Department of Defense or for the specific services rendered, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the duration and scope suggest a substantial, ongoing need for these services. The contract type (Time and Materials) can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly, but the overall value appears within a plausible range for complex engineering support.

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 does not specify the number of bidders, but this procurement method generally encourages a robust competitive environment. This approach is designed to ensure that the government receives the best possible value by leveraging the widest range of capabilities and pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it drives down prices through market forces, ensuring that government funds are used efficiently and effectively.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and potentially other branches of the Department of Defense requiring advanced systems engineering and electronic equipment support. Services delivered likely include design, development, integration, testing, and sustainment of complex electronic and communication systems. The geographic impact is centered around the contractor's location in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and the operational locations of the supported military units. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers, technicians, and support staff within the contractor's organization and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can pose a risk of cost escalation if not closely monitored for labor hours and material costs.
Lack of specific performance metrics or quality assurance details in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's performance beyond contract completion.
The broad nature of 'Systems Engineering Services' could lead to scope creep if not clearly defined and managed throughout the contract lifecycle.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that likely yielded favorable pricing.
A multi-year contract duration indicates a sustained need and potentially a successful working relationship, allowing for long-term project development.
The contractor, Lear Siegler Services Inc., has a history of performing government contracts, implying established processes and experience.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences, with a strong emphasis on electronics and communication equipment. The market for defense-related systems engineering is substantial, driven by the continuous need for technological advancement in military capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense to firms specializing in defense electronics and systems integration.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically mandated for small businesses through a set-aside program. However, the prime contractor, Lear Siegler Services Inc., may still engage small businesses as subcontractors based on their own procurement needs and policies, contributing indirectly to the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the administrative contracting officer within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's terms and conditions, including delivery schedules, performance standards, and payment terms. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, although detailed operational oversight information is often sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Systems Engineering Support
Electronic Warfare Systems
Communications Equipment Procurement
Military Research and Development Contracts
Aerospace Engineering Services
Department of Defense IT and Communications

Risk Flags

Contract Type Risk (Time and Materials)
Potential for Scope Creep
Limited Publicly Available Performance Metrics

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $106.0 million to AMENTUM SERVICES, INC.. 200411!007779!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0703DB010 !A!N! !Y!0062 ! !20040802!20070130!073871048!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES INC !900 CLOPPER ROAD !GAITHERSBURG !MD!20878!31175!031!24!GAITHERSBURG !MONTGOMERY !MARYLAND !+000000500000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!Y!2!014!B! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !C!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AMENTUM SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $106.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-08-02. End: 2009-09-30.

What was the specific nature of the 'Systems Engineering Services' provided under this contract?

The provided data classifies the service under PSC code R414 (Engineering and Technical Services) and NAICS code 541710 (Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences). While the contract title is 'SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES', the specifics are not detailed. Typically, such services for the Department of Defense involve the design, integration, testing, and lifecycle management of complex systems, particularly in electronics and communication equipment. This could encompass areas like radar systems, communication networks, electronic warfare capabilities, or command and control systems, requiring expertise in hardware, software, and system architecture.

How does the $106 million contract value compare to similar systems engineering contracts within the DoD?

Direct comparison is difficult without access to a comprehensive database of similar contracts with detailed service descriptions and durations. However, $106 million spread over approximately five years (August 2004 - September 2009) represents an average annual value of roughly $21.2 million. This figure is substantial and indicative of a significant, long-term engineering support requirement. Larger defense contracts can range from tens of millions to billions of dollars, so this contract appears to be a mid-to-large size engagement within the specialized field of defense systems engineering, reflecting the complexity and criticality of the services.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or deliverables expected from Lear Siegler Services Inc. under this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or specific deliverables for this contract. Standard practice for systems engineering contracts involves adherence to technical specifications, meeting project milestones, successful system integration and testing, and timely delivery of reports or documentation. Performance would likely be evaluated based on the contractor's ability to meet the technical requirements of the systems being developed or supported, manage project timelines, and control costs within the agreed-upon framework, especially given the Time and Materials nature of the award.

What is the track record of Lear Siegler Services Inc. with government contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Lear Siegler Services Inc. (now part of Amentum Services, Inc. following acquisitions) has a significant history of performing contracts for the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense. While this specific contract data is from the early 2000s, the company has consistently been involved in providing technical, engineering, and support services to various government agencies. Their portfolio often includes complex projects related to aerospace, defense systems, and infrastructure support. A deeper dive into contract databases would reveal the volume, value, and types of contracts they have held over the years, providing a more comprehensive view of their performance and reliability.

Were there any notable challenges or issues encountered during the performance of this contract?

The provided summary data does not indicate any specific challenges, disputes, or contract modifications that would suggest significant performance issues during the execution of this $106 million contract. Contracts of this magnitude and duration can often involve modifications for scope adjustments or funding changes. Without access to contract performance reports or official dispute records, it's assumed the contract was performed without major disruptions or negative outcomes that would be flagged in a high-level summary.

How did the 'Time and Materials' contract type influence the final cost and oversight requirements?

The 'Time and Materials' (T&M) contract type means the government pays the contractor for direct labor hours at specified fixed hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials and subcontracts. This type of contract is often used when the scope of work cannot be precisely defined at the outset or is expected to change. For taxpayers, T&M contracts carry a higher risk of cost overruns compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently. Consequently, government oversight must be robust, focusing on monitoring labor hours, verifying material costs, and ensuring efficient resource utilization to prevent unnecessary expenditures.

Industry Classification

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

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: 14

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM (UEI: 153561212)

Address: 20501 SENECA MEADOWS PKWY STE 300, GERMANTOWN, MD, 20876

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $110,988,618

Exercised Options: $110,988,618

Current Obligation: $106,036,902

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DAAB0703DB010

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline