DoD's $57.2M helicopter engineering contract awarded to Engility Services, LLC, raises value and competition questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $57,211,025 ($57.2M)

Contractor: Engility Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-03-01

End Date: 2012-11-30

Contract Duration: 2,101 days

Daily Burn Rate: $27.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE EXECUTIVE PRESIDENTIAL HELICOPTER PROGRAM

Place of Performance

Location: PATUXENT RIVER, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20670

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $57.2 million to ENGILITY SERVICES, LLC for work described as: ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE EXECUTIVE PRESIDENTIAL HELICOPTER PROGRAM Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, but limited bidder information warrants scrutiny. 2. Pricing and value-for-money assessment is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns. 3. Risk indicators include potential for cost overruns given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure. 4. Performance context is limited due to lack of specific outcome metrics. 5. Sector positioning within engineering services for defense is significant, but specific benchmarks are needed. 6. Small business participation appears minimal based on initial data.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $57.2 million over five years for engineering services presents a moderate value. Benchmarking against similar presidential helicopter program support contracts is difficult without more granular data on the specific services rendered and the complexity involved. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while common for complex R&D or services where costs are uncertain, can sometimes lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed tightly. Further analysis of the fixed fee percentage and the contractor's ability to manage costs within the estimated ceiling is recommended.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. However, the number of actual bidders is not specified, which is crucial for a thorough assessment of the competition's robustness. A high number of bidders typically drives down prices and encourages innovation. Without knowing the bidder pool size and the evaluation criteria, it's difficult to definitively state if the competition effectively achieved optimal price discovery and value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment, the lack of specific bidder numbers prevents a precise quantification of the taxpayer savings achieved through this process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and potentially the Executive branch, ensuring the continued operational readiness and support for presidential helicopter operations. Services delivered include critical engineering support, maintenance planning, and technical expertise for complex aircraft systems. The geographic impact is primarily centered around military installations and contractor facilities involved in defense aviation support, likely within Maryland. Workforce implications include the employment of specialized engineers, technicians, and support staff within Engility Services, LLC and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can incentivize cost escalation if not rigorously overseen.
Limited public data on specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the contractor's efficiency and effectiveness.
The duration of the contract (over 5 years) increases the potential for scope creep or unforeseen cost increases.
Lack of transparency regarding the number of bidders in the full and open competition limits the assessment of competitive pressure on pricing.
The specific nature of 'engineering services' for a presidential helicopter program implies high stakes and potential for complex, costly challenges.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating an effort to leverage market capabilities.
The contract supports a critical national security asset (presidential helicopter program), implying a focus on reliability and quality.
Engility Services, LLC, as a contractor, likely possesses specialized expertise required for such a sensitive program.
The fixed fee component in the CPFF structure provides some level of cost predictability for the contractor's profit.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader engineering services sector, specifically supporting defense aerospace. The market for specialized engineering services for military aviation is substantial, driven by the need for advanced technological support, maintenance, and upgrades for complex aircraft. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts for major defense platforms, considering factors like contract type, duration, and the specific technical requirements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (sb) was false and set-aside (ss) was false for this contract. This suggests that the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses, and there is no indication of significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses being mandated or actively pursued under this award. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract appears to be minimal.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Navy, a component of the Department of Defense. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's terms, including performance standards, reporting requirements, and payment schedules tied to milestones or deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, though detailed performance reports and cost breakdowns are often not publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Presidential Helicopter Program (VH-92A)
Department of Defense Engineering Services
Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Aerospace Engineering Support

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent cost oversight.
Limited public data on bidder numbers hinders full competition assessment.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes value-for-money evaluation difficult.
Contract duration increases potential for scope changes and cost adjustments.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $57.2 million to ENGILITY SERVICES, LLC. ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE EXECUTIVE PRESIDENTIAL HELICOPTER PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENGILITY SERVICES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $57.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-03-01. End: 2012-11-30.

What was the specific nature of the engineering services provided under this contract, and how did they contribute to the presidential helicopter program's readiness?

The contract data specifies 'Engineering Services' (NAICS 541330) for the Executive Presidential Helicopter Program. While the exact breakdown of services is not detailed in the provided summary, typical engineering support for such critical assets includes areas like systems engineering, design modifications, reliability and maintainability analysis, technical data package development, logistics support analysis, and potentially software engineering for onboard systems. These services are crucial for ensuring the presidential helicopters remain operational, safe, and technologically current to meet the demanding requirements of presidential transport. Without specific performance reports, it's difficult to quantify the direct contribution to readiness, but the contract's duration and value suggest a significant and ongoing role in maintaining and evolving the platform's capabilities.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure compare to other contract types for similar defense engineering services, and what are the implications for cost control?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract structure is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined, or when significant research and development is involved, making it difficult to estimate costs accurately beforehand. In a CPFF contract, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing their profit. This contrasts with fixed-price contracts, where the total price is agreed upon upfront, placing more cost risk on the contractor. For complex defense engineering services, CPFF can incentivize contractors to perform the work diligently, as they are assured of their fee. However, it also places a greater burden on the government to meticulously monitor and audit contractor costs to prevent overruns. If not managed effectively, CPFF contracts can lead to higher overall expenditures compared to well-defined fixed-price contracts, as the government bears the brunt of cost uncertainty. The fixed fee itself, however, is negotiated and capped, providing some level of profit predictability.

What was the competitive landscape for this contract, and how many bids were received?

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition,' which theoretically means that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. However, the provided data does not specify the number of bids received or the number of offerors. This lack of detail is a significant gap in assessing the true level of competition. A robust competition typically involves multiple, well-qualified bidders vying for the contract, which generally leads to better pricing and service offerings for the government. If only a few bids were received, or if the competition was structured in a way that limited participation, the government may not have achieved the best possible value. Further investigation into the solicitation details and award documents would be necessary to ascertain the precise competitive dynamics.

What is Engility Services, LLC's track record with similar large-scale defense engineering contracts, particularly those involving high-security or critical asset support?

Engility Services, LLC (which later merged with TASC and became part of SAIC) has a history of performing large-scale contracts, including significant work within the Department of Defense and intelligence communities. Their portfolio often included IT services, systems engineering, and technical support for complex defense programs. While specific details on their performance for the presidential helicopter program under this particular contract are not publicly detailed in the summary, their general experience suggests they possessed the requisite security clearances and technical capabilities to handle sensitive projects. Evaluating their broader track record would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, any documented issues or successes on comparable contracts, and their overall reputation within the defense contracting industry for reliability and quality execution on critical programs.

Are there any publicly available performance metrics or key performance indicators (KPIs) associated with this contract that demonstrate its success or effectiveness?

The provided summary data does not include specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Publicly available contract award data typically focuses on administrative details like the award amount, contractor, dates, and contract type, rather than granular performance outcomes. Assessing the success or effectiveness of engineering services, especially for a program as critical as the presidential helicopter fleet, often relies on internal government evaluations, contractor performance reports, and potentially Inspector General reviews. These detailed performance assessments are usually not made public due to security concerns, proprietary information, or the sheer volume of data. Therefore, without access to these internal government assessments or specific deliverables tied to KPIs, it is challenging to quantitatively demonstrate the contract's effectiveness based solely on the provided information.

How does the total spending of approximately $57.2 million on this specific engineering support contract compare to historical spending trends for presidential helicopter support over the years?

The $57.2 million awarded over the contract's duration (approximately 5 years) represents an average annual spend of roughly $11.4 million for engineering services related to the presidential helicopter program. Comparing this to historical spending requires access to historical budget data and contract awards for previous presidential helicopter fleets (e.g., the VH-3D, VH-60N). Presidential helicopter programs are inherently high-cost due to the stringent security, reliability, and technological requirements. Spending can fluctuate significantly based on the phase of the program lifecycle (e.g., development, sustainment, upgrades) and the specific platform being supported. Without detailed historical data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this $57.2 million figure is high, low, or average. However, it reflects a substantial investment in maintaining and supporting a critical national asset, consistent with the high-value nature of such programs.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002407R3047

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Engility Corporation (UEI: 783837672)

Address: 35 NEW ENGLAND BUSINESS CTR DR STE 200, ANDOVER, MA, 01810

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $559,748,351

Exercised Options: $166,167,687

Current Obligation: $57,211,025

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4143

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline