DoD awards $3.26M for threat system engineering, with a 1095-day performance period

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,266,440 ($3.3M)

Contractor: Modern Technology Solutions, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-09-11

End Date: 2028-09-10

Contract Duration: 1,095 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM REQUIREMENTS DEFINITION, DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS, INTEGRATION, ASSESSMENT, AND PLANNING TO DELIVER HIGHLY TECHNICAL THREAT SYSTEM ENGINEERING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35808

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $3.3 million to MODERN TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC. for work described as: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM REQUIREMENTS DEFINITION, DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS, INTEGRATION, ASSESSMENT, AND PLANNING TO DELIVER HIGHLY TECHNICAL THREAT SYSTEM ENGINEERING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on advanced threat system engineering, including requirements definition and integration. 2. Performance period spans three years, indicating a need for sustained technical support. 3. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. This award is a Delivery Order under a larger contract vehicle. 5. The contractor, Modern Technology Solutions, Inc., has a significant role in delivering technical products. 6. The scope includes analysis, assessment, and planning for highly technical defense products.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $3.26 million over three years suggests a moderate investment in specialized engineering services. Benchmarking against similar contracts for threat system engineering is difficult without more specific details on the technical requirements and deliverables. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces potential for costs to exceed initial estimates, requiring diligent oversight to ensure value for money. The fixed fee component provides some incentive for the contractor to control costs, but the primary cost driver remains the actual expenses incurred.

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 had the opportunity to submit proposals. This competitive process is generally expected to yield fair market pricing and innovative solutions. The specific number of bidders is not provided, which limits a deeper analysis of the intensity of the competition. However, the 'full and open' designation suggests a robust selection process.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best technical solution at a reasonable price. Full and open competition increases the likelihood that the government is not overpaying for specialized engineering services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the Missile Defense Agency, receiving advanced threat system engineering products and services. Services delivered include requirements definition, development, analysis, integration, assessment, and planning. The geographic impact is primarily within Alabama, where the contractor is located. This contract supports a highly technical workforce specializing in defense engineering and threat systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can lead to cost escalation if not closely monitored.
The specific technical deliverables and performance metrics are not detailed, making it hard to assess performance outcomes.
Reliance on a single delivery order under a potentially larger contract vehicle might limit visibility into the overall program's cost-effectiveness.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
The contractor, Modern Technology Solutions, Inc., is tasked with highly technical and critical defense engineering functions.
A defined performance period of three years provides clarity on the expected duration of services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the defense sector, specifically focusing on advanced engineering and technical services related to threat systems. The market for such specialized services is driven by government defense spending, particularly in areas like missile defense. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more granular data on the specific technical requirements and the complexity of the threat systems involved. The overall defense engineering services market is substantial, with numerous contractors vying for these high-value, specialized contracts.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and the contractor is not a small business (ss: false). Therefore, there are no direct small business set-aside implications for this specific award. However, the potential for subcontracting opportunities with small businesses exists, depending on the contractor's strategy and the nature of the services required. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting goals were established or met.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) within the Department of Defense. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, rigorous financial oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures against the estimated costs and ensure the fixed fee is justified. Accountability measures would be tied to the performance metrics and deliverables outlined in the contract. Transparency is generally maintained through contract awards databases, but detailed performance reports are typically internal to the agency.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Threat Analysis and Simulation
Defense Engineering Services
Advanced Technology Development
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires close monitoring to prevent cost overruns.
Lack of specific technical deliverables in the provided data makes performance assessment difficult.
The 'full and open' competition level is positive, but the number of bidders is unknown, limiting insight into competition intensity.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $3.3 million to MODERN TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC.. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM REQUIREMENTS DEFINITION, DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS, INTEGRATION, ASSESSMENT, AND PLANNING TO DELIVER HIGHLY TECHNICAL THREAT SYSTEM ENGINEERING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MODERN TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-09-11. End: 2028-09-10.

What is the track record of Modern Technology Solutions, Inc. in delivering similar threat system engineering services to the DoD?

Modern Technology Solutions, Inc. (MTSI) has a documented history of providing advanced engineering and technical services to various government agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their expertise often spans areas such as systems engineering, test and evaluation, modeling and simulation, and acquisition support. For threat system engineering specifically, MTSI has been involved in projects related to developing and analyzing complex defense systems. While this specific contract is for $3.26 million over three years, MTSI's broader portfolio includes larger and more complex engagements. A detailed review of their past performance on similar contracts, including client feedback and any past performance issues, would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment. However, their consistent presence and awards in the defense sector suggest a generally positive track record in delivering technical solutions.

How does the $3.26 million contract value compare to other DoD contracts for threat system engineering services?

The $3.26 million contract value for threat system engineering services over three years is considered moderate within the context of Department of Defense spending. Large-scale defense programs can involve contracts worth hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. However, for specialized engineering support, requirements definition, and analysis, this amount is significant and reflects the technical expertise required. Contracts for similar services can range widely depending on the complexity of the threat systems, the scope of work (e.g., research vs. development vs. sustainment), and the duration. Without specific details on the technical requirements and deliverables of this particular contract, a precise comparison is challenging. However, it aligns with the typical investment for focused, high-level technical support in specialized defense domains.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for threat system engineering?

The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for threat system engineering is the potential for cost overruns. In a CPFF structure, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee. While the fixed fee provides some incentive for the contractor to manage costs efficiently, the government bears the risk of cost increases if actual expenses exceed estimates. For highly technical and complex areas like threat system engineering, where unforeseen technical challenges or scope changes can arise, the potential for cost escalation is significant. Effective risk mitigation requires robust government oversight, clear definition of allowable costs, and diligent monitoring of the contractor's expenditures and progress to ensure the project remains within budget expectations.

How effective is 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for money for specialized defense engineering services?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in government contracting, including for specialized defense engineering services. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices, encourages innovation, and increases the likelihood of selecting the best-value solution. For complex services like threat system engineering, where technical merit is as crucial as cost, a well-defined solicitation that allows for thorough evaluation of both technical proposals and pricing is essential. While competition helps, the government must still perform thorough cost analysis and oversight to ensure that the winning bid truly represents good value and that the contractor delivers as promised.

What is the historical spending pattern for threat system engineering services by the Missile Defense Agency?

Historical spending patterns for threat system engineering services by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) indicate a consistent and significant investment in this area. The MDA's mission inherently requires advanced capabilities in understanding, analyzing, and countering threats, necessitating substantial funding for related engineering and technical services. While specific annual figures fluctuate based on program priorities and acquisition cycles, the MDA has historically allocated considerable resources to research, development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) that includes threat system engineering. This contract, valued at $3.26 million, represents a portion of that ongoing investment. Analyzing broader MDA budgets and contract awards for similar services over the past decade would reveal trends in spending, key contractors, and the evolution of technological requirements.

What are the implications of this contract being a Delivery Order under a larger contract vehicle?

This contract being a Delivery Order (DO) under a larger contract vehicle means that the underlying contract (often an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity - IDIQ, or a Multiple Award Task Order Contract - MATOC) was previously competed and awarded. The Delivery Order itself then specifies the exact requirements, quantity, and delivery schedule for a particular need. The implications include: 1) Efficiency: It allows for faster procurement of specific services without needing to re-compete the entire scope of work. 2) Flexibility: Agencies can adapt to changing needs by issuing different DOs. 3) Competition: Depending on the structure of the parent contract, DOs may be competed among awardees or issued to a single awardee. If the parent contract was competed broadly, this DO benefits from that initial competition. However, the specific value and terms of the DO are critical for assessing value for money on this particular task.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing › Ammunition (except Small Arms) Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5285 SHAWNEE RD, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22312

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $160,729,599

Exercised Options: $61,061,289

Current Obligation: $3,266,440

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA865625DB007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline