GSA awards $45.6M engineering services contract to KBR Wyle for T&E architecture support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $45,663,819 ($45.7M)

Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2019-12-24

End Date: 2024-12-23

Contract Duration: 1,826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: TEST AND TRAINING ENABLING ARCHITECTURE

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22350

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $45.7 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: TEST AND TRAINING ENABLING ARCHITECTURE Key points: 1. Contract provides critical support for test and training architecture, ensuring readiness. 2. KBR Wyle Services, LLC, a significant player in government contracting, holds this award. 3. The contract spans five years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. Engineering services are essential for maintaining and advancing complex defense infrastructure. 5. The award was made under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 6. This contract falls under the General Services Administration's Federal Acquisition Service. 7. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) allows for flexibility but requires careful oversight. 8. The base contract value is substantial, reflecting the scope of work.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $45.6 million over five years for engineering services related to test and training architecture appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for defense infrastructure suggests this pricing is within expected ranges. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, while offering flexibility for evolving requirements, necessitates diligent cost tracking and performance monitoring to ensure value for money. Without specific per-unit cost data, a direct comparison is difficult, but the overall contract size aligns with the complexity of supporting a national test and training architecture.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The fact that it was competed openly suggests a healthy market for these specialized engineering services. While the number of bidders is not specified, open competition generally leads to better price discovery and a wider range of technical solutions being considered by the agency. This approach is designed to ensure the government receives the best possible value.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices due to market forces and a broader selection of qualified contractors, leading to more efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are military branches and defense agencies relying on robust test and training environments. Services delivered include engineering support crucial for the development, maintenance, and enhancement of the Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA). The geographic impact is national, supporting defense readiness across various training and testing facilities. Workforce implications include the potential for highly skilled engineering and technical jobs, both within the contractor and potentially supporting government personnel. This contract directly contributes to the operational effectiveness and technological superiority of the U.S. military.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize contractors to increase costs to maximize profit if not closely monitored.
The long duration of the contract (5 years) increases the risk of scope creep or evolving requirements not being adequately managed.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical infrastructure support could pose a risk if performance issues arise.
The specific nature of 'engineering services' can be broad, requiring clear definition of deliverables and performance metrics.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that should yield good value.
The contractor, KBR Wyle Services, LLC, has a significant presence and experience in government contracting, particularly in engineering and technical services.
The contract supports a critical national defense capability (Test and Training Architecture), indicating strategic importance and likely well-defined requirements.
The General Services Administration (GSA) is known for its established procurement processes and oversight capabilities.
The five-year duration allows for stability and continuity in supporting essential defense infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector is characterized by high demand from government agencies, particularly in defense, aerospace, and infrastructure development. The market size for government engineering services is substantial, with significant annual spending. This specific contract supports the Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA), a vital system for military readiness, placing it within the defense technology and simulation sub-sector. Comparable spending benchmarks for large-scale engineering support contracts often run into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the complexity and duration.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a specific small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. The prime contractor is KBR Wyle Services, LLC, a large entity. However, large prime contractors are often required to provide subcontracting opportunities to small businesses as part of their contract terms. The extent to which small businesses will be involved in fulfilling this contract through subcontracting is not detailed in the provided data but is a common practice for large federal awards to foster small business participation in the federal marketplace.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) through its Federal Acquisition Service, which awarded the contract. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type necessitates robust financial oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract. Performance monitoring would involve tracking key performance indicators (KPIs) related to the engineering services provided for the Test and Training Enabling Architecture. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically fall under the GSA's IG for any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA)
Engineering Services
Defense Infrastructure Support
Federal Acquisition Service Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Military Readiness Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF structure.
Long contract duration may lead to scope creep.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical infrastructure.
Need for robust performance monitoring and oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $45.7 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. TEST AND TRAINING ENABLING ARCHITECTURE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $45.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-12-24. End: 2024-12-23.

What is the historical spending pattern for the Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA) program?

The provided data focuses on a single contract award valued at $45.6 million for KBR Wyle Services, LLC, covering the period from December 2019 to December 2024. This represents a significant portion of funding for TENA support during this timeframe. To understand the broader historical spending pattern, one would need to examine prior contracts awarded for TENA development and maintenance, as well as any other concurrent contracts supporting the architecture. Analyzing spending trends over multiple fiscal years, including contract modifications and task orders, would reveal the program's lifecycle costs, investment priorities, and fluctuations in funding based on evolving defense needs and technological advancements. Without access to historical contract databases or program budget documents, a comprehensive analysis of past spending is not possible from this single data point.

How does the awarded amount compare to other engineering services contracts awarded by the GSA?

The $45.6 million award for engineering services to support the Test and Training Enabling Architecture is a substantial contract, particularly given its five-year duration. The General Services Administration (GSA) awards a vast number of contracts across various categories. For engineering services (NAICS 541330), contract values can range widely from small, specialized task orders to multi-billion dollar programs. A $45.6 million contract over five years averages approximately $9.1 million per year. This places it in the mid-to-large tier for engineering services contracts within GSA's portfolio. Larger contracts often involve extensive infrastructure projects or complex system development. This specific award appears to be a significant investment in a critical defense enabler, reflecting the specialized nature and importance of the TENA program.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically associated with engineering services contracts for defense architecture?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for engineering services contracts supporting defense architectures like TENA are designed to ensure reliability, performance, and security. Common KPIs include system uptime and availability rates, ensuring the architecture is consistently accessible for testing and training. Performance metrics might also track the successful integration of new capabilities or modifications, measured by time-to-deploy and adherence to technical specifications. Responsiveness to user-reported issues and the speed of resolution for critical bugs are crucial. Furthermore, adherence to cybersecurity protocols and successful completion of security audits are paramount. For Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts, KPIs also extend to cost control and efficient resource utilization, ensuring the project stays within budget parameters while meeting technical objectives.

What is KBR Wyle Services, LLC's track record with similar government contracts?

KBR Wyle Services, LLC, is a well-established government contractor with a significant history of performance across various agencies, including the Department of Defense and NASA. They have extensive experience in providing engineering, scientific, and technical support services. Their track record often includes work on complex aerospace, defense, and infrastructure projects. Publicly available contract databases and performance assessment reports (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) would provide detailed insights into their past performance, including ratings on technical execution, cost control, schedule adherence, and management. Generally, companies of KBR's size and tenure have demonstrated capabilities in managing large, complex contracts, though specific performance can vary by contract and program.

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

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure, while offering flexibility for evolving requirements common in complex engineering projects, carries inherent risks. For the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may have less incentive to control costs rigorously compared to fixed-price contracts, as allowable costs are reimbursed, and the fixed fee provides a guaranteed profit margin. This can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently. The contractor bears the risk of cost overruns only if actual costs exceed the estimated cost ceiling, but their profit (the fixed fee) remains constant. Effective oversight, detailed cost accounting, and robust performance monitoring are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the government receives value for its investment. Scope definition and change management are also critical to prevent uncontrolled cost growth.

Industry Classification

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

Solicitation ID: ID11190009

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Brown & Root Industrial Services Holdings, LLC

Address: 22309 EXPLORATION DRIVE, 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: $79,349,537

Exercised Options: $49,304,774

Current Obligation: $45,663,819

Actual Outlays: $-548,762

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 27

Total Subaward Amount: $16,034,513

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU118

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline