GSA awards $64.4M engineering services contract to ManTech for National Capital Region support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $64,383,819 ($64.4M)

Contractor: Mantech Advanced Systems International, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2020-04-10

End Date: 2025-04-09

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

Place of Performance

Location: SAINT INIGOES, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20684

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $64.4 million to MANTECH ADVANCED SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. for work described as: NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION Key points: 1. Contract provides engineering services critical for the National Capital Region's infrastructure. 2. The contract was awarded using full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. A Time and Materials pricing structure may pose cost control challenges if not closely managed. 4. The contract duration of five years indicates a long-term need for these services. 5. The award to a single contractor suggests a focus on specialized capabilities or a competitive outcome. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags potential missed opportunities for smaller firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $64.4 million over five years averages approximately $12.88 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar engineering services contracts for regional support is difficult without more specific service details. However, the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, can lead to cost overruns if not meticulously monitored. The absence of a fixed price component or clear cost ceilings warrants scrutiny to ensure value for money.

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 data does not specify the number of bidders, but this method generally fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The government likely received multiple proposals, allowing for a selection based on a balance of technical merit and cost.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it is expected to yield the best value through a robust bidding process, potentially leading to lower prices than sole-source or limited competition awards.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely federal agencies operating within the National Capital Region requiring specialized engineering support. Services delivered are expected to encompass a range of engineering disciplines essential for maintaining and improving regional infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated within the National Capital Region, including Maryland and Virginia. Workforce implications may include the direct employment of engineers and technical staff by the contractor, as well as potential indirect impacts on supporting industries.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials (T&M) contract type can lead to cost uncertainty and potential overruns if not managed effectively.
The duration of the contract (5 years) requires ongoing vigilance to ensure continued value and performance.
Lack of specific performance metrics or deliverables in the provided data makes it hard to assess performance outcomes.
The absence of small business participation could limit broader economic impact and innovation.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that should drive value.
The contract addresses a long-term need for engineering services in a critical region.
The contractor, ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc., is an established entity in the federal contracting space.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a significant segment of the federal procurement landscape. Engineering services are vital for government operations, encompassing design, consulting, and project management across various infrastructure and technology domains. Spending in this sector is often driven by modernization efforts, infrastructure upkeep, and specialized technical requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend heavily on the specific engineering disciplines and the scale of projects undertaken within the National Capital Region.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the requirement was either too large or specialized for small business capabilities, or that the competition was open to all eligible firms. Consequently, there may be limited direct subcontracting opportunities for small businesses unless the prime contractor voluntarily includes them. This approach might overlook potential innovation and cost efficiencies that small businesses can offer.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Federal Acquisition Service. GSA typically employs contract officers, contracting specialists, and program managers to monitor performance, ensure compliance with contract terms, and manage financial aspects. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract clauses, including performance standards and remedies for non-performance. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

GSA Federal Acquisition Service Contracts
Engineering and Technical Services
National Capital Region Support Contracts
Time and Materials Contracts
Professional Services Schedules (if applicable)

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
Lack of defined performance metrics in provided data.
Limited visibility into the number of bidders.
Absence of small business participation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $64.4 million to MANTECH ADVANCED SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC.. NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MANTECH ADVANCED SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $64.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-04-10. End: 2025-04-09.

What is ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc.'s track record with the GSA and for similar engineering services contracts?

ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc. has a significant history of contracting with the federal government, including numerous awards from the General Services Administration (GSA) across various service categories. Their track record often includes support for defense, intelligence, and civilian agencies, frequently involving complex engineering, IT, and mission support services. For contracts similar to this one, focusing on engineering services within specific geographic regions, ManTech has demonstrated capabilities in managing large-scale, long-term engagements. Performance history, as reflected in contract databases and past performance evaluations, generally indicates a mature contractor capable of handling substantial federal requirements. However, a detailed review of past performance reviews and any documented disputes or corrective actions would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment specific to this contract's scope and value.

How does the $64.4 million value compare to other engineering services contracts awarded by GSA in the National Capital Region?

The $64.4 million contract value over five years represents a substantial award for engineering services within the National Capital Region (NCR). While specific benchmarks are difficult without granular data on the exact services provided, GSA awards significant contracts for professional and engineering services to support the NCR's vast federal presence. Contracts in the range of $10-20 million annually for specialized engineering support are not uncommon for large federal regions. This $12.88 million average annual value places it within the upper tier of such contracts, suggesting a comprehensive scope of work or a high level of specialized expertise required. Comparisons would ideally involve analyzing the number of bidders, contract type, and specific deliverables of other NCR engineering contracts to ascertain if this represents a competitive price point or a premium for specific capabilities.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this engineering services award?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this $64.4 million engineering services award is the potential for cost overruns and a lack of definitive cost control. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M contracts reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials. This structure provides flexibility, which can be beneficial when the scope of work is not fully defined or is expected to evolve. However, it places a significant burden on the government to closely monitor labor hours, ensure efficiency, and validate costs. Without robust oversight, contractors may have less incentive to control costs, potentially leading to expenditures exceeding initial estimates. This necessitates strong government project management and detailed reporting from the contractor to mitigate risks and ensure value for taxpayer money.

How effective is 'full and open competition' likely to be in ensuring value for money on this contract?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in federal contracting, as it maximizes the pool of potential bidders and encourages competitive pricing. For this $64.4 million engineering services contract, this approach suggests that multiple companies vied for the award, theoretically driving down costs and improving the quality of proposals. The government's ability to select the best value offer, considering both technical merit and price, is enhanced. However, the ultimate effectiveness hinges on the clarity of the solicitation requirements, the evaluation criteria used, and the government's diligence in assessing proposals. If the competition was robust (i.e., numerous qualified bidders) and the evaluation process rigorous, it significantly increases the likelihood of achieving good value. Conversely, if the competition was technically 'open' but practically limited due to highly specialized requirements or few capable bidders, the value proposition might be less pronounced.

What are the historical spending patterns for engineering services contracts in the National Capital Region by GSA?

General Services Administration (GSA) historically awards substantial amounts for engineering and related professional services to support the National Capital Region (NCR). Spending patterns often reflect the ongoing need for infrastructure maintenance, modernization, and support for federal agencies housed within the region. GSA utilizes various contract vehicles, including its Multiple Award Schedules (MAS) and specific Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts, to procure these services. Annual spending can fluctuate based on federal budget allocations, major infrastructure projects, and agency-specific requirements. While precise historical figures for engineering services alone in the NCR are complex to isolate without detailed data mining, GSA's overall procurement portfolio demonstrates a consistent and significant investment in professional and engineering services to maintain and enhance the federal presence in this critical area. This contract aligns with those established spending patterns.

What are the implications of this contract not having a small business set-aside for the small business ecosystem?

The absence of a small business set-aside for this $64.4 million contract has several implications for the small business ecosystem. Primarily, it means that small businesses were not given preferential consideration or a dedicated portion of the contract value. This could be due to the specialized nature of the engineering services required, the large contract size making it difficult for small businesses to compete or perform, or a strategic decision by the agency to pursue broader competition. Consequently, direct prime contracting opportunities for small businesses are eliminated. While the prime contractor, ManTech, may voluntarily subcontract portions of the work to small businesses, there is no contractual obligation for them to do so under this award structure. This can limit the infusion of federal dollars directly into the small business sector and potentially reduce opportunities for small firms to gain experience on large, complex federal projects.

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

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Mantech International Corporation

Address: 2251 CORPORATE PARK DR STE 600, HERNDON, VA, 20171

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $65,704,036

Exercised Options: $65,704,036

Current Obligation: $64,383,819

Actual Outlays: $-10,208

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 103

Total Subaward Amount: $42,230,097

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU324

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline