Raytheon Company awarded $76M engineering services contract by Department of the Army

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $76,018,269 ($76.0M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-05-01

End Date: 2014-05-02

Contract Duration: 731 days

Daily Burn Rate: $104.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: OAWR 418-BCTS-18ABN

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, ORANGE County, FLORIDA, 32826

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $76.0 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: OAWR 418-BCTS-18ABN Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Time and Materials, which can pose cost control risks if not managed closely. 3. The duration of 731 days indicates a significant, long-term engagement for engineering services. 4. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to a focus on engineering services. 6. The contract was awarded in Florida, indicating a specific geographic focus for the services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $76 million over two years for engineering services requires careful benchmarking against similar Department of Defense contracts. Without specific details on the scope of work and deliverables, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. Time and Materials contracts, by their nature, can lead to higher costs if not meticulously managed, as they reimburse actual labor and material costs plus a fee. This contract's value should be compared to the complexity and criticality of the engineering services provided.

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 a bid. This suggests a robust bidding process where multiple companies likely vied for the contract. The level of competition can generally lead to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government, as contractors are incentivized to offer competitive pricing to win the award.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation from multiple providers.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from specialized engineering services to support its operations and infrastructure. The contract likely supports military readiness and technological advancement within the Army. The geographic impact is centered in Florida, where the services are being performed. The contract may have implications for the engineering workforce in Florida, providing employment opportunities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type introduces potential for cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the services.
The raw dollar amount, while significant, does not provide context on the scope or complexity of the engineering work.
Limited information on the specific engineering disciplines required makes it hard to gauge the criticality of the services.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
The contractor, Raytheon Company, is a well-established defense contractor with extensive experience.
The contract duration suggests a sustained need for these engineering services by the Army.

Sector Analysis

Engineering services are a critical component of the defense sector, encompassing design, development, testing, and maintenance of complex systems. The market for these services within the defense industry is substantial, driven by the continuous need for modernization and operational support. This contract fits within the broader category of professional services procured by the Department of Defense to maintain its technological edge and operational capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering service contracts awarded by military branches for similar durations and scopes.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large prime contract awarded to Raytheon Company, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors. However, without specific subcontracting plans or goals detailed in the award, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small business participation was mandated or encouraged.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are typically embedded within the contract terms, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Engineering Services
Army Professional Services Contracts
Defense Acquisition Programs
Time and Materials Contracts

Risk Flags

Time and Materials contract type carries inherent cost risk.
Lack of detailed scope of work limits assessment of value.
No specific performance metrics provided.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $76.0 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. OAWR 418-BCTS-18ABN

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $76.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-05-01. End: 2014-05-02.

What specific engineering services were procured under this contract, and what was the scope of work?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 541330, which is 'Engineering Services.' However, the specific nature of these services is not detailed. This could range from civil engineering for infrastructure projects, mechanical engineering for equipment, electrical engineering for systems, or specialized aerospace engineering, depending on the Army's requirements. A comprehensive understanding of the scope of work is crucial for assessing the contract's value, risks, and performance. Without this information, it's challenging to determine if the $76 million award is commensurate with the services rendered or if it represents a fair price for the complexity and duration involved.

How does the awarded amount of approximately $76 million compare to similar engineering service contracts awarded by the Department of the Army or other defense agencies?

Benchmarking the $76 million award requires comparing it against contracts with similar scopes, durations, and service types within the defense sector. For instance, if this contract covers broad, long-term support for multiple installations, the value might be reasonable. However, if it's for a highly specialized, short-term project, it could be on the higher end. Data from similar Time and Materials contracts for engineering services awarded by the Department of Defense over a two-year period would provide a more accurate comparison. Factors like the number of bidders, the contractor's historical pricing, and the specific technical requirements heavily influence cost, making direct comparisons challenging without granular data.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Raytheon Company's performance on this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Raytheon Company's performance. For Time and Materials contracts, performance is often assessed based on adherence to schedules, quality of deliverables, responsiveness to requests, and effective management of labor hours and material costs. Robust oversight mechanisms would typically involve regular progress reviews, technical inspections, and financial audits. The absence of explicit performance metrics in the summary data makes it difficult to ascertain how the government ensures the contractor is meeting its obligations effectively and efficiently.

What is Raytheon Company's track record with the Department of Defense for similar engineering service contracts?

Raytheon Company is a major defense contractor with a long history of performing a wide array of services for the Department of Defense, including engineering services. Their track record typically involves large-scale, complex projects across various military branches. While specific performance details for this particular contract are not provided, Raytheon's general reputation is that of a capable, albeit sometimes costly, provider of advanced technological and engineering solutions. Past performance reviews, contract award histories, and any documented issues or commendations related to their previous DoD contracts would offer a more detailed insight into their reliability and effectiveness in delivering engineering services.

What are the potential risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this $76 million award, and how are they mitigated?

The primary risk with Time and Materials contracts is the potential for cost overruns, as the government pays for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred by the contractor, plus a fixed fee or profit. This can lead to unpredictable final costs if the scope of work expands or if labor hours are not efficiently managed. Mitigation strategies typically include establishing strong oversight by government contracting officers and technical representatives, setting ceiling prices, requiring detailed reporting of labor and materials, and conducting regular audits. The government must actively manage the contract to ensure that the work performed is necessary and that the hours billed are reasonable and allocable to the contract.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: RTX Corp

Address: 2603 CHALLENGER CT STE150, ORLANDO, FL, 32826

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $76,018,269

Exercised Options: $76,018,269

Current Obligation: $76,018,269

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W900KK07D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline