Department of Transportation's $348M contract for communication equipment repair and maintenance awarded to Leidos, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $348,196,148 ($348.2M)

Contractor: Leidos, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2006-12-22

End Date: 2020-07-31

Contract Duration: 4,970 days

Daily Burn Rate: $70.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: CLIN 1110 - ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED - SUPPORTS CONTINUANCE OF GUST TEST CLINS TO TAKE US UP TO TIME WHEN DLO OPERATIONS STARTED (11/9/06) GCCS (LOCKHEED MARTIN) CONTRACT # DTFAWA-03-C-00059 SPENDING PLAN # 07-AJW4400-2001 POP: 10/01/05 - 11/09/06 NATIONAL PROJECT CODE: 11270121 PR EXPLANATION: EXPENSE 00 - PROJECT CREATED AS CAPITAL, TASK DOES NOT SUPPORT ASSETS BEING PROCURE. (OPERATING LEASE)

Place of Performance

Location: CHERRY HILL, CAMDEN County, NEW JERSEY, 08002

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $348.2 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: CLIN 1110 - ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED - SUPPORTS CONTINUANCE OF GUST TEST CLINS TO TAKE US UP TO TIME WHEN DLO OPERATIONS STARTED (11/9/06) GCCS (LOCKHEED MARTIN) CONTRACT # DTFAWA-03-C-00059 SPENDING PLAN # 07-AJW4400-2001 POP: 10/01/05 - 11/09/06 NATIONAL PROJECT CODE: … Key points: 1. The contract's value of $348M over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in maintaining critical communication infrastructure. 2. The award to Leidos, Inc. indicates a concentration of this specific service with a major defense and government contractor. 3. The contract's duration of 4970 days (approximately 13.6 years) points to a long-term need for these services. 4. The 'DEFINITIVE CONTRACT' award type suggests a framework for ongoing services rather than a single project. 5. The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' pricing structure warrants scrutiny to ensure cost control and value for money. 6. The contract's primary purpose appears to be supporting the continuance of GUST test capabilities until DLO operations commenced.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific details on the scope of 'Communication Equipment Repair and Maintenance' and the criticality of the GUST test CLINS. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, while common for R&D or uncertain scope, can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly. Comparing it to similar long-term, high-value maintenance contracts for complex communication systems would be necessary for a more precise value assessment. The significant duration suggests a substantial, ongoing need, but the exact value-for-money proposition depends heavily on the efficiency and effectiveness of the services provided by Leidos, Inc.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION,' indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This approach is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers. The number of bidders and the specific evaluation criteria would provide further insight into the strength of the competition. A full and open competition suggests that the government sought the best value from a wide range of potential providers.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at competitive prices, potentially leading to cost savings compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and potentially other Department of Transportation entities benefit from the reliable operation of communication equipment. The services delivered ensure the continuity of critical testing and operational capabilities, such as the GUST test CLINS. The contract's performance is located in New Jersey, indicating a specific geographic impact for this service. The contract likely supports a workforce skilled in the repair and maintenance of specialized communication equipment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader 'Communication Equipment Repair and Maintenance' sector, a critical component of national infrastructure, particularly for agencies like the FAA. The market for such services is often characterized by specialized technical expertise and long-term support agreements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale, multi-year contracts for maintaining complex communication systems across various federal agencies, considering factors like system complexity, uptime requirements, and technological obsolescence.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. However, the prime contractor, Leidos, Inc., may engage small businesses for subcontracting opportunities as part of its overall supply chain management, though this is not explicitly detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the Department of Transportation's Federal Aviation Administration. Accountability measures would be defined in the contract terms, including performance metrics and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

transportation, federal-aviation-administration, leidos-inc, communication-equipment-repair-and-maintenance, definitive-contract, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, new-jersey, long-term-contract, infrastructure-support

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $348.2 million to LEIDOS, INC.. CLIN 1110 - ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED - SUPPORTS CONTINUANCE OF GUST TEST CLINS TO TAKE US UP TO TIME WHEN DLO OPERATIONS STARTED (11/9/06) GCCS (LOCKHEED MARTIN) CONTRACT # DTFAWA-03-C-00059 SPENDING PLAN # 07-AJW4400-2001 POP: 10/01/05 - 11/09/06 NATIONAL PROJECT CODE: 11270121 PR EXPLANATION: EXPENSE 00 - PROJECT CREATED AS CAPITAL, TASK DOES NOT SUPPORT ASSETS BEING PROCURE. (OPERATING LEASE)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $348.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-12-22. End: 2020-07-31.

What was the specific nature and criticality of the GUST test CLINS that necessitated this extended funding and support?

The provided data indicates that the 'CLIN 1110 - ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED - SUPPORTS CONTINUANCE OF GUST TEST CLINS TO TAKE US UP TO TIME WHEN DLO OPERATIONS STARTED (11/9/06)'. This suggests that the GUST (Ground User Support Terminal) test capabilities were essential for a transitional period until the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) operations commenced. The criticality likely stemmed from ensuring the functionality and reliability of these test systems during a period of operational change or system migration. Without further details on the GUST test's specific function within the FAA's or DLA's operations, it's difficult to quantify its exact importance, but its role in bridging an operational gap implies a significant, albeit temporary, need for uninterrupted service.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure for this contract compare to industry standards for similar long-term maintenance agreements?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or involves a degree of uncertainty, such as in research and development or long-term, evolving maintenance. For long-term communication equipment maintenance, CPFF can be advantageous for the government by providing a stable contractor relationship and ensuring services are available. However, it places a greater burden on the government to meticulously track costs and ensure efficiency, as the contractor is reimbursed for actual costs plus a fixed fee. Industry standards vary; some long-term maintenance contracts might utilize fixed-price models for well-defined services or performance-based contracts that incentivize specific outcomes. The appropriateness of CPFF here depends on the predictability of maintenance needs and the ability of the FAA to effectively monitor and control costs throughout the contract's extensive duration.

What was the competitive landscape like for this 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' award, and how many bids were received?

The data explicitly states that the contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION,' which implies that the solicitation was broadly advertised, and any responsible source was permitted to submit an offer. While the provided data does not specify the exact number of bids received, the 'full and open' designation suggests that multiple proposals were likely submitted and evaluated. This type of competition is designed to maximize the pool of potential offerors, thereby fostering a more robust price discovery process and increasing the likelihood of the government obtaining the best value. Without the specific number of bidders, it's challenging to definitively assess the intensity of the competition, but the chosen procurement method signals an intent to leverage market forces.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract of this duration (nearly 14 years) in the rapidly evolving field of communication technology?

A contract spanning nearly 14 years in communication technology carries several inherent risks. Technological obsolescence is a primary concern; the equipment and systems being maintained may become outdated, requiring costly upgrades or replacements that might not be adequately covered by the original contract terms. Furthermore, the long duration increases the risk of contractor performance degradation over time, potential shifts in market pricing making the original rates less competitive, and the possibility of unforeseen operational changes within the agency that could alter the scope or necessity of the services. Effective contract management, including regular reviews, scope adjustments, and potentially incorporating technology refresh clauses, is crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure continued value.

Can we assess the contractor's (Leidos, Inc.) track record with similar large-scale communication maintenance contracts based on this award alone?

This award to Leidos, Inc. for communication equipment repair and maintenance, valued at approximately $348 million over a long period, certainly indicates their capability to handle large, complex government contracts. Leidos is a well-established prime contractor with significant experience in defense, intelligence, and federal civilian sectors, often undertaking substantial IT and systems integration projects. However, this single data point is insufficient to comprehensively assess their track record specifically for *this type* of long-term, specialized communication maintenance. A full assessment would require examining their performance history on similar contracts, including past performance evaluations, any contract disputes or terminations, and their demonstrated ability to manage costs and deliver services effectively within budget and on schedule across multiple projects.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration)Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and MaintenanceCommunication Equipment Repair and Maintenance

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 611641312)

Address: 700 N FREDERICK AVE, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20879

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $480,881,271

Exercised Options: $352,604,770

Current Obligation: $348,196,148

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 2006-12-22

Current End Date: 2020-07-31

Potential End Date: 2020-07-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2018-03-07

More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.

View all Leidos, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Transportation Contracts

View all Department of Transportation contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending