DoD's $54.9M contract for systems engineering services awarded to Lear Siegler Services, Inc. shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $54,882,591 ($54.9M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-02-01

End Date: 2008-03-31

Contract Duration: 789 days

Daily Burn Rate: $69.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 14

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200605!001838!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0703DB010 !A!N! !Y!0118 ! !20060201!20110129!834530086!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC !595 SHREWSBURY AVENUE !SHREWSBURY !NJ!07702!37810!029!34!LAKEHURST NAS !OCEAN !NEW JERSEY!+000009875000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !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: SHREWSBURY, MONMOUTH County, NEW JERSEY, 07702, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $54.9 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC. for work described as: 200605!001838!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0703DB010 !A!N! !Y!0118 ! !20060201!20110129!834530086!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC !595 SHREWSBURY AVENUE !SHREWSBURY !NJ!07702!37810!029!34!LAKEHURST NAS !OCEA… Key points: 1. The contract's value of $54.9 million over its period of performance raises questions about cost-effectiveness. 2. While the contract was competed, the number of bidders and specific competition dynamics are not fully detailed, impacting price discovery assessment. 3. The 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' NAICS code suggests a specialized service, but the specific deliverables are not fully clear. 4. The contract's duration of 789 days (approximately 2 years) is a moderate length, requiring ongoing performance monitoring. 5. The award to Lear Siegler Services, Inc. warrants a review of their past performance and track record in similar contracts. 6. The contract's classification as 'Time and Materials' can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $54.9 million for systems engineering services over a period of approximately two years appears substantial. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for specialized engineering support within the Department of Defense is crucial. Without more granular data on the specific services rendered and the labor categories involved, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the 'Time and Materials' pricing structure necessitates close oversight to ensure costs remain aligned with the value delivered and do not exceed market rates for comparable expertise.

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 offers. However, the provided data does not specify the number of bids received. A higher number of bids typically suggests more robust competition, which can lead to better pricing and terms for the government. The absence of this detail limits a full assessment of how effectively competition drove value.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible price through market forces. However, the ultimate benefit depends on the number of actual bidders and the effectiveness of the evaluation process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely components within the Department of Defense requiring advanced systems engineering expertise. The services delivered are categorized under 'Systems Engineering Services' and 'Electronics and Communication Equipment,' suggesting support for complex technological systems. The geographic impact is centered around the contracting agency, likely within the United States, supporting national defense infrastructure. The contract supports a specialized workforce in systems engineering and related technical fields.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader 'Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' sector, specifically focusing on systems engineering. The market for such services is highly specialized, with a significant portion driven by government defense and aerospace needs. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies for similar technological domains. The size of this contract suggests it addresses a significant requirement.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this specific contract, as it does not appear to be a small business set-aside and the prime contractor is not identified as a small business. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist, but are not explicitly detailed in the provided information. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business involvement in the supply chain for this contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army and the Department of Defense's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, but detailed operational oversight specifics are typically internal to the agency.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, systems-engineering, electronics-and-communication-equipment, time-and-materials, full-and-open-competition, new-jersey, large-contract, research-and-development, professional-scientific-and-technical-services

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $54.9 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC.. 200605!001838!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0703DB010 !A!N! !Y!0118 ! !20060201!20110129!834530086!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC !595 SHREWSBURY AVENUE !SHREWSBURY !NJ!07702!37810!029!34!LAKEHURST NAS !OCEAN !NEW JERSEY!+000009875000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is URS FEDERAL 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 $54.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-02-01. End: 2008-03-31.

What is the track record of Lear Siegler Services, Inc. in performing similar systems engineering contracts for the Department of Defense?

Lear Siegler Services, Inc. has a history of performing various services for the U.S. government, including in areas related to defense and aerospace. To assess their track record for this specific contract, a detailed review of their past performance evaluations on similar systems engineering or electronics-related contracts would be necessary. This would involve examining past performance questionnaires (PPQs), any documented performance issues or commendations, and their history of meeting cost, schedule, and technical requirements on prior awards. Without access to these specific performance records, it's challenging to definitively gauge their suitability and reliability for this particular $54.9 million engagement.

How does the $54.9 million award compare to the average cost of similar systems engineering contracts within the DoD?

The $54.9 million total award for Lear Siegler Services, Inc. represents a significant investment in systems engineering. To benchmark this value, one would need to compare it against a portfolio of similar contracts awarded by the Department of Defense over a comparable timeframe. Key comparison points would include the contract type (e.g., Time and Materials vs. Firm-Fixed-Price), the specific technical scope, the duration of performance, and the number of bidders. If this contract's per-year cost or cost per deliverable is substantially higher than comparable contracts, it could indicate potential issues with pricing or efficiency. Conversely, if it aligns with or is lower than benchmarks, it suggests a potentially reasonable cost for the services rendered.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Time and Materials' contract for systems engineering services, and how were they mitigated in this award?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts carry inherent risks, primarily the potential for cost overruns, as the government pays for the actual labor hours and materials used, plus a fixed fee or percentage. This structure can incentivize longer project durations or less efficient work if not tightly managed. For this contract, risks could include escalating labor costs or unexpected material expenses. Mitigation strategies typically involve establishing labor hour ceilings, detailed reporting requirements, robust oversight by government contracting officers, and clear definitions of what constitutes a billable hour or material. The effectiveness of these mitigation efforts would depend on the diligence of the government's program management and contract administration.

What specific systems engineering or electronics and communication equipment capabilities does this contract entail?

The contract specifies 'Systems Engineering Services' (NAICS 541710 - Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences, though often used for engineering services) and 'Electronics and Communication Equipment' (PSC R414). This suggests the contract likely involves the design, integration, testing, and maintenance of complex electronic and communication systems. It could encompass areas such as radar, signal intelligence, network infrastructure, or other specialized defense communication technologies. The 'Research and Development' aspect of the NAICS code implies that the work might involve innovation, prototyping, or advanced technical problem-solving rather than just off-the-shelf procurement or routine maintenance.

How has federal spending in 'Systems Engineering Services' evolved over the past decade, and where does this contract fit within that trend?

Federal spending on 'Systems Engineering Services' has generally seen a steady increase over the past decade, driven by the increasing complexity of defense systems, IT infrastructure, and technological modernization efforts across agencies. This $54.9 million contract, awarded in 2006, falls within a period of significant defense spending. Its size suggests it was a substantial award for its time, likely supporting a major program or a critical set of capabilities. Analyzing historical spending trends in this category, particularly within the Department of Defense, would provide context on whether this contract represented a typical investment or an outlier in terms of scale and scope.

What is the significance of the contract being awarded to Lear Siegler Services, Inc. in the context of the broader defense contracting landscape?

Lear Siegler Services, Inc. (now part of Fluor Corporation) has been a long-standing contractor supporting various aspects of government operations, including defense. Its involvement in a $54.9 million systems engineering contract indicates its capability and capacity to handle large, complex projects. In the broader defense contracting landscape, which is often dominated by a few very large prime contractors, companies like Lear Siegler play a crucial role in providing specialized expertise and supporting specific program needs. Their ability to secure such contracts reflects their established presence and technical proficiency within the sector.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesScientific Research and Development ServicesResearch 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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

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

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DAAB0703DB010

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2006-02-01

Current End Date: 2008-03-31

Potential End Date: 2008-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2015-05-20

More Contracts from URS Federal Services Inc.

View all URS Federal Services Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending