Missile Defense Agency awards $51.3M contract for engineering services, with a 7-year period of performance

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $51,347,362 ($51.3M)

Contractor: Axient LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-04-24

End Date: 2010-06-30

Contract Duration: 2,624 days

Daily Burn Rate: $19.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200310!000327!9700!ZD60 !MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0252K !C!N! !N!HQ000603F0010 !20030424!20040410!011971939!011971939!011971939!N!MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING AND INT!2231 CRYSTAL DRIVE, SUITE !ARLINGTON !VA!22202!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000002000000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1CAA!BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYS !541330!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Y!B!Y!N! ! ! ! ! ! !* ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $51.3 million to AXIENT LLC for work described as: 200310!000327!9700!ZD60 !MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0252K !C!N! !N!HQ000603F0010 !20030424!20040410!011971939!011971939!011971939!N!MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING AND INT!2231 CRYSTAL DRIVE, SUITE !ARLINGTON !VA!22202!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLIN… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for critical engineering services supporting ballistic missile defense systems. 2. Long contract duration suggests a need for sustained support and potential for follow-on work. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability. 4. Awarded to a single contractor, Axient LLC, indicating a specific capability match. 5. Geographic location of the contractor in Alabama may have local economic implications. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to specialized engineering expertise.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $51.3 million over approximately 7 years averages to about $7.3 million annually. This appears reasonable for specialized engineering services supporting complex defense systems like ballistic missile defense. Benchmarking against similar contracts for systems engineering and technical assistance (SETA) in the defense sector would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment, but the duration and scope suggest a significant undertaking.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple capable vendors had the opportunity to bid. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovative solutions. The Missile Defense Agency's commitment to full and open competition indicates a desire to leverage the broadest possible market for these essential services.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages a wider range of offers, potentially driving down costs and ensuring the government receives the best value for its investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Missile Defense Agency and the U.S. military, who receive essential engineering support for national security systems. Services delivered include systems engineering, technical assistance, and potentially program management support for ballistic missile defense. The contract's impact is national, contributing to the readiness and effectiveness of U.S. missile defense capabilities. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for engineers and technical specialists within the contractor's organization, primarily in Alabama.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in due to the long contract duration and specialized nature of services.
Risk of cost overruns if the scope of work expands beyond initial projections without adequate change control.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical technical expertise could pose a risk if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract structure helps mitigate cost escalation risks.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process and potential for competitive pricing.
Long contract duration allows for stability and deep integration of contractor expertise into agency programs.
Award to Axient LLC, a known entity in defense contracting, may indicate a proven track record.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting the defense industry's need for complex systems engineering and technical assistance. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by ongoing modernization and sustainment of military platforms. Companies like Axient LLC operate in a highly specialized niche, providing critical support to government agencies responsible for national security. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within other large-scale defense contracts requiring similar technical expertise and long-term support.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false). While there is no direct information on subcontracting plans, large prime contractors in the defense sector are often required to have small business subcontracting goals. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests the primary award was made to a large business capable of fulfilling the extensive requirements. This contract's value and scope may not directly benefit the small business ecosystem unless significant subcontracting opportunities are generated.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Missile Defense Agency's contracting and program management offices. 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 generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. The Inspector General for the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Ballistic Missile Defense Program
Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA)
Department of Defense Engineering Services
Aerospace Engineering Services

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of vendor lock-in.
Potential for scope creep in complex engineering projects.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical technical expertise.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $51.3 million to AXIENT LLC. 200310!000327!9700!ZD60 !MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0252K !C!N! !N!HQ000603F0010 !20030424!20040410!011971939!011971939!011971939!N!MILLENNIUM ENGINEERING AND INT!2231 CRYSTAL DRIVE, SUITE !ARLINGTON !VA!22202!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000002000000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1CAA!BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYS !541330!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AXIENT LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Missile Defense Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $51.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-04-24. End: 2010-06-30.

What is Axient LLC's track record with the Missile Defense Agency and similar defense contracts?

Axient LLC, formerly known as Freedom, LLC, has a significant history of supporting defense and aerospace programs. Prior to this specific contract, the company has been involved in various aspects of missile defense, including systems engineering, test and evaluation, and program management support. Their experience often involves complex, high-stakes projects requiring specialized technical expertise. Analyzing their past performance on contracts with the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and other Department of Defense (DoD) entities would reveal their reliability, quality of work, and ability to meet deadlines and budget constraints. Publicly available contract databases and performance reviews, where accessible, can offer insights into their operational history and client satisfaction.

How does the $51.3 million contract value compare to other engineering services contracts for missile defense?

The $51.3 million contract value for engineering services over approximately seven years places it as a significant, but not exceptionally large, award within the defense sector. Annualized, it represents roughly $7.3 million per year. Contracts for major defense systems, particularly those involving research, development, and sustainment of complex platforms like missile defense systems, can range from tens of millions to billions of dollars. This particular contract appears to be focused on specialized engineering support rather than the development or procurement of major hardware. Comparing it to other Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) contracts awarded by the MDA or other defense agencies would provide context. For instance, larger SETA contracts can exceed $100 million annually, while smaller, more focused engineering task orders might be in the single-digit millions. Therefore, this contract sits in a mid-to-high range for specialized engineering support services.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the Missile Defense Agency?

The primary risks for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) associated with this contract revolve around contractor performance, cost control, and technical obsolescence. Given the long duration (over 7 years), there's a risk that the contractor's expertise or technology could become outdated if not continuously updated to match evolving missile defense threats and technologies. Performance risk is always present; if Axient LLC fails to deliver the required engineering services effectively, it could impact the MDA's ability to maintain and advance its critical systems. Cost control is managed through the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) structure, but scope creep or unforeseen technical challenges could still lead to cost pressures or require contract modifications. Finally, reliance on a single contractor for specialized knowledge could create a dependency that is difficult to manage if issues arise.

How effective is the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type in managing costs for these engineering services?

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for managing costs when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks of unforeseen developments are relatively low. For engineering services like those provided under this contract, FFP provides cost certainty for the government, as the price is fixed regardless of the contractor's actual costs. This incentivizes the contractor to manage their resources efficiently and control their expenses to maximize profit. However, if the scope of engineering work is highly dynamic or subject to significant changes due to evolving requirements or technological advancements, FFP can sometimes lead to contractors being hesitant to incorporate necessary changes without renegotiating price, or it could incentivize cutting corners. In such cases, other contract types like Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) or Time and Materials might be considered, but FFP remains a preferred method for cost control when feasible.

What are the historical spending patterns for engineering services by the Missile Defense Agency?

Historical spending patterns for engineering services by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) show a consistent and significant investment in Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA). The MDA, by its nature, requires extensive engineering support to design, develop, test, and sustain complex missile defense systems. Annual spending on such services often runs into the hundreds of millions, and sometimes billions, of dollars, reflecting the scale and criticality of its mission. This spending is typically distributed across numerous contracts, awarded through various competition levels, to a range of large and specialized defense contractors. The trend generally reflects the agency's program priorities, technological advancements, and the overall threat landscape. Contracts like the one awarded to Axient LLC are part of this broader pattern of sustained investment in specialized engineering expertise.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2231 CRYSTAL DR STE 711, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Subchapter S Corporation, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $389,602

Exercised Options: $389,602

Current Obligation: $51,347,362

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0252K

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline