Over $150M in direct awards for air traffic systems management and engineering support to five TMIS multiple awardees

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,208,704 ($22.2M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2012-02-14

End Date: 2016-12-07

Contract Duration: 1,758 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: N.T.E. $150M DIRECTED AWARDS TO FIVE (5) TMIS MULTIPLE AWARDEES FOR AIR TRAFFIC SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT.

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20597

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $22.2 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: N.T.E. $150M DIRECTED AWARDS TO FIVE (5) TMIS MULTIPLE AWARDEES FOR AIR TRAFFIC SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT. Key points: 1. The contract's total ceiling of $150 million indicates a significant investment in critical air traffic infrastructure. 2. The use of multiple awardees suggests an effort to foster competition and leverage diverse expertise. 3. The contract's duration of approximately 4.8 years implies a need for sustained support in a complex domain. 4. The 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' NAICS code points to a broad scope of potential services. 5. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, aiming for the best value. 6. The cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing structure suggests that while costs are reimbursed, a fixed profit is targeted.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total ceiling of $150 million for air traffic systems management and engineering support is substantial. While specific cost breakdowns per awardee are not provided, the multiple award structure under full and open competition suggests an intent to achieve competitive pricing. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for critical infrastructure would be necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. However, the competitive award process is a positive indicator for price discovery.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit an offer. The presence of five multiple awardees suggests a robust competitive environment at the outset, allowing the government to select contractors based on a combination of technical merit and price. The specific number of bids received for each delivery order is not detailed, but the initial competition for the multiple award contract likely drove down prices.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by ensuring that the government receives competitive pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions, maximizing the value of federal dollars spent.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and its stakeholders benefit from improved air traffic management systems. Services delivered include crucial engineering support for the nation's air traffic control infrastructure. The geographic impact is national, affecting all air travel within the United States. The contract supports a specialized workforce in systems management and engineering within the aerospace and technology sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts if not closely monitored.
Scope creep could increase the overall cost beyond the initial $150M ceiling if not managed effectively.
Dependence on a limited number of awardees could pose risks if one or more contractors face performance issues.

Positive Signals

Multiple awardees ensure redundancy and access to a broader pool of expertise.
Full and open competition suggests a focus on achieving best value and competitive pricing.
The contract's focus on critical air traffic systems management addresses a vital national security and economic interest.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on engineering and management consulting related to complex systems. The air traffic control market is a specialized segment within aerospace and defense technology, characterized by high barriers to entry due to stringent regulatory requirements and the need for specialized expertise. The total ceiling of $150 million positions this as a significant contract within this niche, likely supporting upgrades or maintenance of the National Airspace System (NAS). Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other large-scale government IT and engineering support contracts.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. As a large-scale contract with a $150 million ceiling, it is likely that prime contractors are large businesses. However, the potential for subcontracting to small businesses exists, particularly for specialized services, which could contribute to the small business ecosystem if actively pursued.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically reside within the Department of Transportation's Office of the Secretary and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Mechanisms likely include regular performance reviews, milestone tracking, and financial audits. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and public reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

FAA Air Traffic Control Modernization Programs
Department of Transportation IT Support Services
National Airspace System Engineering Contracts
Federal Aviation Systems Management Support

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF structure
Scope creep risk in broad NAICS category
Dependence on contractor performance for critical infrastructure

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $22.2 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. N.T.E. $150M DIRECTED AWARDS TO FIVE (5) TMIS MULTIPLE AWARDEES FOR AIR TRAFFIC SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Immediate Office of the Secretary of Transportation).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-02-14. End: 2016-12-07.

What is the track record of the five TMIS multiple awardees in delivering similar air traffic management and engineering support services?

A comprehensive analysis of the track record of the five TMIS multiple awardees would require examining each contractor's past performance on similar federal contracts, particularly those involving the FAA or other aviation authorities. Key indicators would include on-time delivery, adherence to budget, quality of work, and customer satisfaction ratings. For instance, contractors with a history of successfully managing complex system integration projects or providing critical engineering support for large-scale government IT infrastructure would be considered strong performers. Conversely, a history of contract disputes, performance deficiencies, or significant cost overruns on comparable projects would raise concerns. Without specific data on each awardee's past performance on this particular contract vehicle, a definitive assessment is challenging, but the initial selection process under full and open competition would have theoretically vetted these capabilities.

How does the $150 million ceiling compare to historical spending on similar air traffic systems management and engineering support contracts?

The $150 million ceiling for this contract represents a substantial investment in air traffic systems management and engineering support. To benchmark this figure, one would compare it against the total contract values or ceilings of previous, similar contracts awarded by the FAA or the Department of Transportation for air traffic control modernization, system upgrades, or ongoing engineering support. For example, if previous large-scale engineering support contracts for the National Airspace System (NAS) had ceilings in the range of $50-$100 million, then this $150 million contract indicates a potentially larger scope, longer duration, or increased complexity of the services required. Conversely, if historical contracts for similar services have exceeded $200 million, this contract might represent a more focused or phased approach. Analyzing trends in federal spending on aviation infrastructure and technology over the past decade would provide further context for assessing whether this ceiling is in line with current investment levels.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure for air traffic systems engineering?

The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure, like the one used here, is the potential for cost overruns. In a CPFF arrangement, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While the fee is fixed, the total cost is not, meaning the government bears the risk if costs escalate beyond initial estimates. For complex engineering projects such as air traffic systems, unforeseen technical challenges, scope creep, or inefficient contractor performance can lead to increased costs. To mitigate this risk, robust government oversight, detailed cost tracking, and clear performance metrics are essential. The government must diligently monitor expenditures and ensure that all costs claimed by the contractor are reasonable, allocable, and necessary. Without effective oversight, the CPFF structure can incentivize contractors to incur higher costs, as their profit remains constant regardless of the final expenditure.

How does the 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' NAICS code (541690) influence the scope and potential services under this contract?

The NAICS code 541690, 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services,' indicates a broad scope for this contract, encompassing a wide array of specialized consulting and technical support activities that do not fit into more specific categories. For air traffic systems management and engineering, this could include areas such as systems analysis, requirements definition, technology assessment, process improvement, safety analysis, human factors engineering, and project management. The flexibility of this code allows the government to procure diverse expertise as needed, adapting to evolving technological landscapes and operational requirements within the air traffic control domain. However, it also means that the specific services delivered can vary significantly among the five awardees and across different delivery orders, making it crucial for the contracting officers to clearly define the scope of work for each task to ensure alignment with the overall program objectives and to prevent scope creep.

What is the significance of awarding delivery orders under a multiple award contract for air traffic systems?

Awarding delivery orders under a multiple award contract (MAC) for air traffic systems offers significant advantages. Firstly, it allows the government to procure specific services or products as needed, providing flexibility and responsiveness to changing requirements. Instead of issuing entirely new solicitations for each distinct need, task orders can be issued against the existing MAC. Secondly, the MAC structure, especially when established through full and open competition, ensures that a pre-vetted pool of capable contractors is available. This streamlines the procurement process for individual delivery orders, potentially reducing lead times and administrative burden. Furthermore, the existence of multiple awardees competing for each delivery order can foster ongoing price competition, driving down costs for specific tasks. This approach balances the need for specialized expertise with the government's ability to acquire services efficiently and cost-effectively over the life of the contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting 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: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010 SUNSET HILLS RD FL 4, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $150,000,000

Exercised Options: $150,000,000

Current Obligation: $22,208,704

Actual Outlays: $16,414

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTRT5712D30006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline