Department of Energy's $5.22M DICCE2 contract awarded to TECH2 SOLUTIONS for engineering services
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $5,221,000 ($5.2M)
Contractor: Tech2 Solutions
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2024-03-29
End Date: 2026-03-31
Contract Duration: 732 days
Daily Burn Rate: $7.1K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN, INTEGRATION, CONSTRUCTION, COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGINEERING 2 (DICCE2) CONTRACT VEHICLE.
Place of Performance
Location: RICHLAND, BENTON County, WASHINGTON, 99354
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $5.2 million to TECH2 SOLUTIONS for work described as: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN, INTEGRATION, CONSTRUCTION, COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGINEERING 2 (DICCE2) CONTRACT VEHICLE. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on program management and planning for design, integration, construction, communications, and engineering. 2. Awarded to TECH2 SOLUTIONS under the DICCE2 contract vehicle. 3. Duration of 732 days indicates a medium-term project. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can incentivize cost control but requires careful oversight. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237990 suggests a focus on heavy and civil engineering construction. 6. The contract is a Delivery Order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this specific $5.22 million delivery order is challenging without more context on the scope of services and comparable projects within the DICCE2 vehicle. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure requires diligent oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and the fixed fee aligns with the effort. Without data on the contractor's historical performance or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value assessment is difficult.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' which suggests a competitive process was initiated but specific sources were excluded. This could be due to pre-qualification requirements or specific capabilities needed. The number of bidders and the rationale for exclusions are not detailed, making it difficult to fully assess the breadth of competition and its impact on price discovery.
Taxpayer Impact: While the competition was broad, the exclusion of certain sources might limit the most competitive pricing if those excluded sources offered superior value or lower costs.
Public Impact
The Department of Energy benefits from program management and planning services for critical infrastructure projects. Services include design, integration, construction, communications, and engineering, supporting the agency's mission. The geographic impact is likely focused on areas where the Department of Energy has facilities or projects requiring these services. Workforce implications may include specialized engineering and construction professionals, potentially supporting local economies where projects are located.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The 'Exclusion of Sources' aspect of the full and open competition needs further clarification to ensure no potentially more competitive vendors were unfairly excluded.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly, requiring robust oversight from the agency.
- The specific deliverables and performance metrics are not detailed, making it hard to gauge the full scope and potential risks.
- Reliance on a single delivery order under a larger vehicle might concentrate risk if the contractor faces performance issues.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under a contract vehicle (DICCE2) that likely underwent a competitive process, suggesting a baseline level of vetting.
- The contract is for program management and planning, indicating a focus on structured and organized project execution.
- The fixed fee component of the CPFF contract provides some cost certainty for the government.
- The duration of over two years suggests a commitment to a sustained effort, potentially leading to more stable project outcomes.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically focusing on program management and planning. This sector is critical for infrastructure development and maintenance. The Department of Energy often engages in large-scale projects requiring extensive engineering and construction expertise. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large federal construction and engineering support contracts, often measured in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this particular delivery order. This means that while small businesses could have bid if they met the qualifications, there was no explicit mandate to prioritize them. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist depending on the prime contractor's strategy and the nature of the work, but they are not guaranteed by the contract terms provided.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of Energy's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are tied to the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, requiring the contractor to justify costs and deliver according to the fixed fee. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific project details might be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Energy Program Management Services
- Federal Engineering and Construction Contracts
- DICCE2 Contract Vehicle
- Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction Services
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF structure.
- Ambiguity in 'Exclusion of Sources' could limit competition.
- Lack of detailed performance metrics makes outcome assessment difficult.
- Contract type (Delivery Order) relies on the performance of the parent IDIQ vehicle.
Tags
department-of-energy, program-management, engineering-services, construction, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, delivery-order, tech2-solutions, washington, heavy-civil-engineering
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $5.2 million to TECH2 SOLUTIONS. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN, INTEGRATION, CONSTRUCTION, COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGINEERING 2 (DICCE2) CONTRACT VEHICLE.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is TECH2 SOLUTIONS.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $5.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2024-03-29. End: 2026-03-31.
What is the track record of TECH2 SOLUTIONS with the Department of Energy and similar federal agencies?
Assessing TECH2 SOLUTIONS' track record requires examining their past performance on federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Energy (DOE). This includes reviewing past performance evaluations, any contract disputes or terminations, and their history with similar types of services (program management, design, integration, construction, communications, engineering). Information on their financial stability and capacity to handle projects of this scale is also crucial. Without access to specific past performance data or a detailed contract history, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability and capability for this DICCE2 delivery order. Agencies typically maintain internal performance records and may use sources like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to inform future awards.
How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) compare to other similar federal engineering and construction contracts?
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure is common for federal contracts involving research, development, or complex services where the scope may evolve or is not fully defined at the outset. In CPFF, the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility but can be susceptible to cost growth if not managed rigorously. For engineering and construction services, agencies often use a mix of contract types. Fixed-price contracts are preferred when scope is well-defined to incentivize efficiency. However, for program management and planning where requirements might be less concrete, CPFF can be appropriate. The 'fairness' of the fixed fee itself is a key element of value, benchmarked against industry standards and the complexity of the work.
What are the primary risks associated with this contract and how are they being mitigated?
Key risks for this contract include potential cost overruns inherent in the CPFF structure, scope creep if program management and planning are not tightly controlled, and performance issues from the contractor (TECH2 SOLUTIONS). Mitigation strategies typically involve robust government oversight, detailed work breakdown structures, clear performance metrics, regular progress reviews, and strong contract administration. The 'Exclusion of Sources' in the competition also presents a potential risk if it limited the pool of highly capable or cost-effective bidders. The Department of Energy's contracting and program management teams are responsible for identifying, assessing, and actively managing these risks throughout the contract lifecycle to ensure successful project delivery and value for taxpayer money.
What is the historical spending pattern for similar program management and engineering services within the Department of Energy?
Historical spending patterns for program management and engineering services within the Department of Energy (DOE) are typically substantial, given the agency's mission involving complex energy infrastructure, research, and national security. The DOE frequently awards large contracts for design, construction oversight, environmental remediation, and scientific program management. Analyzing past spending on similar NAICS codes (like 237990) or contract types (CPFF) can provide benchmarks. This specific $5.22 million delivery order appears to be a moderate-sized award within the broader context of DOE's extensive contracting activities. Understanding historical spending helps in evaluating whether current contract values are in line with past investments and market rates for comparable services.
How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' impact potential cost savings for the government?
The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' mechanism implies that while the competition was broadly advertised, certain potential bidders were disqualified or not considered. This could happen for various reasons, such as specific technical requirements, security clearances, or pre-qualification criteria. If the excluded sources represented significant competition or offered potentially lower prices due to unique efficiencies or market positions, their exclusion could limit the downward pressure on pricing. Conversely, if the exclusions were based on necessary qualifications that only a few highly specialized firms possessed, the resulting competition among the remaining qualified bidders might still yield fair market prices. The ultimate impact on cost savings depends heavily on the number and competitiveness of the bidders who remained in the pool.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Solicitation ID: 89233124RNA000230
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 3200 GEORGE WASHINGTON WAY STE D, RICHLAND, WA, 99354
Business Categories: Category Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $6,463,499
Exercised Options: $5,859,808
Current Obligation: $5,221,000
Actual Outlays: $4,355,250
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: DENA0003366
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2024-03-29
Current End Date: 2026-03-31
Potential End Date: 2027-03-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-01-07
More Contracts from Tech2 Solutions
- Kazakhstan Task Order for Design, Integration, Construction, Communication and Engineering 2, Contract Line Item Number 1 (pre-Contract Cost Authorization for Notice to Proceed Issued on July 11, 2017 for Engineering Site Survey in Kazakhstan) — $48.1M (Department of Energy)
- Task Order Lebanon, Design, Integration, Construction, Communication and Engineering 2 — $35.8M (Department of Energy)
- Task Order for Design, Integration, Construction, Communication and Engineering 2 (dicce2) Services in Caucasus Region Group 1, Azerbaijan Program Group 15 — $28.0M (Department of Energy)
- Program Management and Planning for Design, Integration, Construction, Communication and Engineering 2 — $26.4M (Department of Energy)
- Poland Task Order for Design, Integration, Construction, Communication and Engineering 2, Contract Line Item Number 1 — $23.2M (Department of Energy)
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)