DOT's FAA awards $35.2M engineering services contract to CSSI, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,217,993 ($35.2M)

Contractor: Cssi, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2005-03-30

End Date: 2017-09-28

Contract Duration: 4,565 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Transportation

Official Description: REAPS CONTRACT - INITIAL FUNDING TO AWARD CONTRACT. ($25,000.00)

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20024

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $35.2 million to CSSI, LLC for work described as: REAPS CONTRACT - INITIAL FUNDING TO AWARD CONTRACT. ($25,000.00) Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a robust market. 2. Long contract duration of 4565 days (over 12 years) indicates a sustained need. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type offers cost certainty for the government. 4. Initial funding of $25,000 suggests a phased approach or initial task order. 5. Engineering services are critical for infrastructure and operational support. 6. Contractor CSSI, LLC has a track record with government contracts. 7. The contract's value is moderate within the context of large federal procurements.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $35.2 million over 12 years averages to approximately $2.9 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar engineering services contracts for the FAA or other transportation agencies would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The firm fixed price structure helps control costs, but the overall value depends on the scope and quality of services delivered. Without detailed task order data, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging.

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 competitive process is generally expected to yield fair market prices and encourage innovation. The number of bidders and the specific evaluation criteria would further inform the degree of competition achieved.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices and ensuring the government receives the best possible value through a wide selection of qualified contractors.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits from essential engineering services. These services likely support the maintenance, modernization, and operation of air traffic control systems and related infrastructure. The contract's impact is national, given the FAA's oversight of U.S. airspace. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for engineers and technical specialists within CSSI, LLC and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

Engineering services are a broad category crucial for government operations, particularly in sectors like transportation, defense, and infrastructure. The market for these services is competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized expertise. This contract fits within the FAA's broader mission to ensure safe and efficient air travel, requiring ongoing technical support for complex systems. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large engineering support contracts within the Department of Transportation or similar federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb flags are false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. While CSSI, LLC may engage small businesses as subcontractors, there is no explicit indication of a small business set-aside. This means the primary contract was not specifically reserved for small businesses, and its direct impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on subcontracting plans, which are not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Federal Aviation Administration. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed price structure and performance requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

transportation, federal-aviation-administration, engineering-services, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, cssi-llc, district-of-columbia, large-contract, long-term-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $35.2 million to CSSI, LLC. REAPS CONTRACT - INITIAL FUNDING TO AWARD CONTRACT. ($25,000.00)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CSSI, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $35.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-03-30. End: 2017-09-28.

What is the track record of CSSI, LLC with federal contracts, particularly with the FAA?

CSSI, LLC has a history of receiving federal contracts. Analyzing their past performance, including contract values, types, and agencies served, is crucial. For this specific contract, understanding CSSI's prior experience with engineering services relevant to air traffic control or aviation infrastructure would be key. A review of past performance evaluations, if available, would provide insights into their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedules and budgets. Their success on this long-term contract suggests a positive working relationship and satisfactory performance, but a deeper dive into specific project outcomes and client feedback would offer a more comprehensive view.

How does the $35.2 million contract value compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the FAA?

The $35.2 million contract value over approximately 12 years represents an average annual value of roughly $2.9 million. To assess value for money, this figure should be benchmarked against other FAA contracts for similar engineering services, such as system design, integration, maintenance support, or infrastructure development. Factors like contract type (firm fixed price), scope of work, and duration influence comparability. If comparable contracts are significantly higher or lower in annual value for similar services, it could indicate potential overpricing or underbidding, respectively. Without specific comparable contract data, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent or fair value.

What are the primary risks associated with a 12-year firm fixed-price contract for engineering services?

A significant risk with a 12-year firm fixed-price contract is the potential for the fixed price to become misaligned with actual costs due to unforeseen technological advancements, inflation, or changes in regulatory requirements over such a long period. While the firm fixed price offers cost certainty to the government, it shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. If the contractor underestimates costs or faces unexpected challenges, they may cut corners on quality or seek contract modifications. Conversely, if the contractor significantly overestimates, taxpayers may pay a premium. Managing scope creep and ensuring the contract remains relevant to evolving FAA needs are also critical risks.

How effective are firm fixed-price contracts in ensuring performance and quality for long-term engineering projects?

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally effective in controlling costs when the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly. For long-term engineering projects, FFP can incentivize the contractor to be efficient and manage costs tightly. However, the long duration (over 12 years) introduces risks. If the scope is not meticulously defined or if unforeseen technical challenges arise, the contractor might face financial strain, potentially impacting performance or quality. Effective oversight, clear performance metrics, and a mechanism for addressing necessary scope adjustments are crucial to ensure quality is maintained throughout the contract's life under an FFP structure.

What has been the historical spending trend for engineering services by the FAA?

Analyzing historical spending trends for engineering services by the FAA is essential for context. This involves examining annual expenditures on similar contracts over the past 5-10 years. Understanding whether spending has been increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable can indicate shifts in priorities, infrastructure needs, or budget allocations. A significant increase in spending might signal new modernization efforts, while a decrease could suggest project completion or budget constraints. Comparing the $35.2 million award to the historical average or total annual spend on engineering services would help determine if this contract represents a typical investment or a notable deviation.

What is the significance of the initial funding amount ($25,000) relative to the total contract value?

The initial funding of $25,000 is exceptionally low compared to the total contract award of $35.2 million. This typically signifies that the contract was awarded with a small initial task order or funding allocation, with the expectation of subsequent task orders or funding increases over its 12-year duration. This approach allows the agency to begin work while finalizing future requirements or budget approvals. It also provides flexibility. However, it raises questions about the contract's initial scope and how the remaining $35.175 million will be allocated and justified over time. Robust oversight will be needed to ensure subsequent funding aligns with demonstrated needs and value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT)PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Cssi, Inc.

Address: 400 VIRGINIA AVE SW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20024

Business Categories: Category Business, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,697,000,000

Exercised Options: $35,217,993

Current Obligation: $35,217,993

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-03-30

Current End Date: 2017-09-28

Potential End Date: 2017-09-28 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2024-04-05

More Contracts from Cssi, LLC

View all Cssi, LLC federal contracts →

Other Department of Transportation Contracts

View all Department of Transportation contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending