Air Force awards $17.8M engineering services contract to URS Group, Inc. for 862 days

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,780,386 ($17.8M)

Contractor: URS Group, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-21

End Date: 2009-01-30

Contract Duration: 862 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 35

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: OPTION PERIOD 2: AIR FORCE CONTRACT

Place of Performance

Location: NEW ORLEANS, ORLEANS County, LOUISIANA, 70118

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.8 million to URS GROUP, INC. for work described as: OPTION PERIOD 2: AIR FORCE CONTRACT Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is for engineering services, a critical support function for military operations. 3. The duration of 862 days indicates a significant, long-term need for these services. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government. 5. The contract was awarded as a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle. 6. The geographic location of performance is Louisiana.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific $17.8 million contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar engineering service contracts awarded around the same period. The firm-fixed-price structure provides some cost control, but the overall value for money depends heavily on the quality and efficiency of the services delivered by URS Group, Inc. Further analysis would require understanding the specific engineering tasks performed and their criticality to Air Force operations.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' which implies that while the competition was open, there might have been specific reasons for excluding certain potential bidders. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation generally suggests a robust competitive environment. This approach aims to ensure the government receives the best value by considering all qualified sources.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process like this generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices and encouraging innovation among contractors, leading to more cost-effective service delivery.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the U.S. Air Force, which receives essential engineering support. Services delivered likely include design, analysis, and technical consultation for Air Force projects. The geographic impact is centered in Louisiana, where the engineering services will be performed. The contract supports the workforce employed by URS Group, Inc. and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the contractor's effectiveness.
The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type warrants further investigation into its justification.
Limited public information on the specific engineering tasks could obscure potential cost overruns or inefficiencies.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a commitment to market-based pricing.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides budget predictability.
Long contract duration suggests a stable, ongoing need for the services, potentially indicating successful past performance.

Sector Analysis

Engineering services represent a significant segment of the professional services market supporting government operations. This contract falls within the broader category of professional, scientific, and technical services. Comparable spending benchmarks for engineering services vary widely based on specialization, project complexity, and geographic location. The $17.8 million value for an 862-day contract suggests a substantial, ongoing engineering support requirement for the Air Force.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any small business set-aside provisions for this contract. Therefore, it is unlikely that small businesses were specifically targeted for this award. There is no information on subcontracting plans, which would be crucial to understanding the potential impact on the small business ecosystem. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the contract's contribution to small business utilization.

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 inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Air Force Engineering Support Contracts
Department of Defense Professional Services
Louisiana Federal Contracts
URS Group, Inc. Contracts

Risk Flags

Competition exclusion justification unclear
Performance metrics not publicly available
Potential for scope creep or quality reduction in FFP contracts

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.8 million to URS GROUP, INC.. OPTION PERIOD 2: AIR FORCE CONTRACT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is URS GROUP, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $17.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-21. End: 2009-01-30.

What specific engineering services were provided under this contract?

The contract specifies 'Engineering Services' (NAICS code 541330). While the exact nature of these services is not detailed in the provided data, engineering services typically encompass a wide range of activities including design, analysis, testing, consultation, and project management. For the Air Force, this could involve support for infrastructure projects, aircraft systems, weapons systems development, or operational planning. The duration of 862 days suggests these services were ongoing and critical to a specific Air Force mission or program. Further details would likely be found in the contract's statement of work.

How does the contract value of $17.8 million compare to similar engineering service contracts for the Air Force?

Comparing the $17.8 million value requires context regarding the contract's scope, duration, and specific engineering disciplines. For an 862-day period (approximately 2.36 years), this equates to an average annual value of roughly $7.5 million. This figure is moderate for large-scale engineering support contracts within the Department of Defense. However, without knowing the specific services (e.g., basic research support vs. complex system design), direct comparisons are difficult. Benchmarking against other firm-fixed-price engineering service contracts of similar duration awarded by the Air Force would provide a more accurate assessment of value.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for engineering services?

While firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts offer cost certainty, they can introduce risks for both the government and the contractor. For the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or scope to maximize profit, especially if the initial price was set too low or if unforeseen technical challenges arise. Conversely, if the contractor significantly underestimates costs or faces unexpected difficulties, they may incur losses, potentially leading to contract disputes or contractor instability. Effective oversight and a well-defined Statement of Work are crucial to mitigate these risks in FFP contracts for complex services like engineering.

What does the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' designation imply?

This designation suggests that the contract was initially intended for full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. However, 'after exclusion of sources' indicates that certain potential offerors were excluded from the competition, likely due to specific criteria or requirements outlined in the solicitation. This could be for reasons such as past performance issues, inability to meet specific technical qualifications, or other pre-defined exclusion criteria. While it aims for broad competition, the exclusion implies a narrowing of the field based on specific government-determined factors, the justification for which would be documented.

What is the significance of the contract being a 'delivery order'?

A delivery order signifies that this contract is a task order issued under a larger, pre-existing indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar multiple-award contract vehicle. This means that URS Group, Inc. likely held a broader contract with the government, and this specific delivery order represents a defined task with a set value ($17.8 million) and performance period (862 days). This contracting approach allows agencies to procure services more efficiently by having pre-negotiated terms and conditions in place, enabling them to issue orders as needs arise.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102

Offers Received: 35

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM Global II, LLC (UEI: 043271568)

Address: 13825 SUNRISE VALLEY DR ,, HERNDON, VA, 20171

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,521,201

Exercised Options: $17,780,386

Current Obligation: $17,780,386

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA489004D0005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline