DoD's $136M Engineering Services Contract to KBR Wyle Services Shows Mixed Value and Limited Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $136,072,789 ($136.1M)

Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-10-10

End Date: 2015-12-31

Contract Duration: 2,638 days

Daily Burn Rate: $51.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: UCA - ESD 3.0 BLOCK 1 EFFORT

Place of Performance

Location: LEXINGTON PARK, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20653

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $136.1 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: UCA - ESD 3.0 BLOCK 1 EFFORT Key points: 1. The contract's cost-plus-incentive-fee structure suggests a focus on performance, but requires careful monitoring of cost overruns. 2. With only 3 bidders, the competition level may have limited price discovery and potentially inflated costs. 3. The contract duration of over 6 years indicates a long-term need for these engineering services. 4. The absence of small business set-asides raises questions about opportunities for smaller firms in this large contract. 5. The contract's performance period spans a significant portion of the late 2000s and mid-2010s, offering historical context. 6. The engineering services sector is critical for defense readiness, supporting complex technological advancements.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $136 million contract is challenging without specific performance metrics and detailed cost breakdowns. The cost-plus-incentive-fee (CPIF) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly, potentially impacting overall value. Comparing it to similar large-scale engineering services contracts awarded by the DoD during the same period would provide a clearer picture of whether the pricing was competitive and if the services delivered represented good value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 3 bids received. While 'full and open' indicates a broad solicitation, the low number of bidders (3) suggests that the market for these specific, high-value engineering services may be concentrated among a few large firms. This limited competition could have implications for price negotiation and potentially lead to less aggressive bidding.

Taxpayer Impact: A limited number of bidders in a full and open competition can mean that taxpayers may not have benefited from the most competitive pricing achievable if more firms had participated.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, specifically the Air Force, receiving critical engineering support. Services delivered likely include design, analysis, testing, and integration for complex defense systems. The geographic impact is centered around the Department of Defense's operational and research facilities, primarily in Maryland. Workforce implications include employment for highly skilled engineers and technical professionals within KBR Wyle Services and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a vital component of the defense industrial base. This sector provides the specialized expertise required for the design, development, and sustainment of complex military systems. The total market for engineering services is substantial, with defense contracts representing a significant portion. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by the DoD to firms of similar size and capability.

Small Business Impact

This contract did not include a specific small business set-aside, as indicated by 'sb: false'. This means that opportunities for small businesses were likely limited to subcontracting roles, if any were mandated or pursued by the prime contractor. The absence of a set-aside on a contract of this magnitude could mean fewer direct opportunities for small businesses to compete for prime contract work in this specialized engineering domain, potentially impacting the small business ecosystem within the defense sector.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures are embedded in the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structure, which links contractor profit to performance against cost, schedule, and technical targets. Transparency would be assessed through contract reporting mechanisms and public contract databases, though detailed performance data may be limited. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, air-force, engineering-services, full-and-open-competition, delivery-order, cost-plus-incentive-fee, maryland, large-contract, professional-services, technical-services

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $136.1 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. UCA - ESD 3.0 BLOCK 1 EFFORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $136.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-10-10. End: 2015-12-31.

What was the specific nature of the engineering services provided under this contract?

While the data indicates 'UCA - ESD 3.0 BLOCK 1 EFFORT' and 'Engineering Services', the precise nature of the services is not detailed. Typically, such contracts for the Department of Defense (DoD) and Air Force involve a broad range of activities including systems engineering, design, analysis, testing, integration, and technical support for complex defense platforms and technologies. Given the 'Block 1 Effort' designation, it likely supported an early phase of a specific program, possibly related to command and control systems or electronic warfare, requiring specialized engineering expertise for development and initial deployment.

How does the $136 million total value compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the DoD during the 2008-2015 period?

The $136 million total award value for this contract is substantial, placing it among significant engineering services procurements. During the 2008-2015 period, the DoD awarded numerous large contracts for engineering and technical support, often in the hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, particularly for major weapon systems development and sustainment. This specific contract's value appears moderate to high within the context of specialized engineering support, but its relative competitiveness and value-for-money would depend heavily on the scope, duration, and criticality of the services rendered compared to other similar sole-source or competed contracts.

What are the potential risks associated with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract structure for this type of service?

The primary risk with a CPIF contract is the potential for cost overruns if the target costs are not accurately estimated or if the incentive structure does not sufficiently penalize excessive spending. While CPIF aims to incentivize contractor efficiency and performance, it requires robust government oversight to ensure that the incentive targets are challenging yet achievable and that the final cost remains reasonable. If poorly managed, the government could end up paying significantly more than anticipated, diminishing the overall value proposition despite potential performance gains.

Given the 'full and open competition' with 3 bidders, what does this imply about the contractor landscape for these services?

The fact that this contract was competed under 'full and open' conditions but only attracted 3 bidders suggests a potentially concentrated market for these specific engineering services. This could indicate high barriers to entry, such as specialized expertise, security clearances, or existing infrastructure requirements, that limit the number of capable firms. While competition occurred, a smaller pool of bidders might reduce the downward pressure on pricing compared to a scenario with numerous, highly competitive bids, potentially impacting cost efficiency for the government.

What is the historical spending trend for engineering services by the Department of the Air Force in Maryland?

Historical spending data for engineering services by the Department of the Air Force (DAF) in Maryland would likely show a consistent and significant investment, given Maryland's concentration of defense agencies, research institutions (like the National Security Agency), and military installations. The DAF, along with other branches of the DoD, relies heavily on engineering support for its advanced technology programs, cybersecurity initiatives, and platform modernization efforts. Spending in this sector in Maryland has historically been robust, reflecting the state's strategic importance in national defense and its ecosystem of specialized contractors.

How effective was KBR Wyle Services, LLC in managing this contract based on its duration and value?

Assessing the effectiveness of KBR Wyle Services, LLC on this $136 million contract, which ran from October 2008 to December 2015 (over 7 years), requires more granular performance data than provided. However, the contract's successful completion through multiple delivery orders suggests a baseline level of effectiveness in meeting the Air Force's needs. The CPIF structure implies that performance incentives were likely in play, and the government's decision to award and manage multiple orders over such a long period generally indicates satisfaction with the contractor's ability to deliver required services, though specific cost and performance metrics would be needed for a definitive evaluation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering Services

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: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: KBR, Inc.

Address: 22309 EXPLORATION DR, LEXINGTON PARK, MD, 20653

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $136,072,789

Exercised Options: $136,072,789

Current Obligation: $136,072,789

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F0470102D0006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2008-10-10

Current End Date: 2015-12-31

Potential End Date: 2015-12-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2024-09-13

More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC

View all KBR Wyle Services, LLC federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending