DoD's $44.5M contract for mission systems test and evaluation support awarded to J.F. Taylor, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $44,459,740 ($44.5M)

Contractor: J.F. Taylor, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2018-03-07

End Date: 2020-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,030 days

Daily Burn Rate: $43.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: PSC R425 - CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES FOR MISSION SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT FOR THE MISSION SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATION DIVISION OF THE NAWC INTEGRATED SYSTEMS EVALUATION EXPERIMENTATION AND TEST DEPARTMENT.

Place of Performance

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

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $44.5 million to J.F. TAYLOR, INC. for work described as: PSC R425 - CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES FOR MISSION SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT FOR THE MISSION SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATION DIVISION OF THE NAWC INTEGRATED SYSTEMS EVALUATION EXPERIMENTATION AND TEST DEPARTMENT. Key points: 1. Contract provides critical support for mission systems test and evaluation, enhancing warfighter capabilities. 2. J.F. Taylor, Inc. has a history of supporting complex defense programs. 3. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 4. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) allows for flexibility but requires careful cost oversight. 5. Performance is concentrated in Maryland, indicating a specific geographic impact. 6. The duration of the contract (over 3 years) suggests a long-term need for these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $44.5 million over three years for specialized engineering and test support appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar complex defense system development and testing contracts. While specific per-unit cost data is not provided, the fixed fee component suggests a defined profit margin. The breadth of services required for mission systems test and evaluation often commands significant investment, and the pricing appears to be within expected ranges for this type of specialized technical support.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded using full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The fact that it was competed suggests that the Navy actively sought the best value and pricing available in the market. Without specific details on the number of bids received, it's difficult to definitively assess the intensity of the competition, but the process itself is designed to foster price discovery and encourage competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by promoting a wider range of offers, potentially leading to lower prices and better quality services compared to sole-source or limited competitions.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and the warfighters who rely on effective mission systems. Services delivered include test and evaluation support for mission systems, crucial for system readiness and performance. The contract's performance is geographically concentrated in Maryland. The contract supports a specialized workforce of engineers and technical experts in defense contracting.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize contractors to incur higher costs if not managed diligently, potentially impacting overall value.
The specialized nature of the services means limited options for finding alternative contractors if performance issues arise.
Long-term contracts can sometimes lead to complacency or reduced urgency if not actively managed and monitored.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust market assessment and competitive pricing potential.
J.F. Taylor, Inc. has a demonstrated history in defense contracting, suggesting familiarity with requirements and processes.
The contract supports critical mission systems, directly contributing to national defense capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense mission systems. The market for defense engineering and test support services is substantial, driven by continuous modernization and sustainment needs of military platforms. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar test and evaluation support contracts within the Department of Defense often range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the complexity and duration of the systems involved. This contract represents a significant, but not outlier, investment in maintaining and improving critical defense capabilities.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific small business subcontracting requirements in the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless J.F. Taylor, Inc. voluntarily engages small businesses as subcontractors. The absence of a set-aside suggests the primary focus was on securing specialized capabilities available from larger or more established firms.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, requiring detailed cost reporting and justification. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC) Contracts
Mission Systems Development and Testing
Defense Engineering Services
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Department of Defense Test and Evaluation

Risk Flags

Cost Overrun Risk (CPFF)
Contractor Performance Monitoring
Technical Scope Creep

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $44.5 million to J.F. TAYLOR, INC.. PSC R425 - CONTRACTOR SUPPORT SERVICES FOR MISSION SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT FOR THE MISSION SYSTEMS TEST AND EVALUATION DIVISION OF THE NAWC INTEGRATED SYSTEMS EVALUATION EXPERIMENTATION AND TEST DEPARTMENT.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J.F. TAYLOR, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $44.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-03-07. End: 2020-12-31.

What is J.F. Taylor, Inc.'s track record with the Department of the Navy and similar contracts?

J.F. Taylor, Inc. has a significant history of contracting with the Department of Defense, including the Department of the Navy. Their portfolio often includes complex engineering, test, and evaluation services for various defense platforms and systems. Reviewing their contract history reveals numerous awards for similar support services, indicating a sustained capability and established relationship with defense agencies. While specific performance metrics for past contracts are not detailed here, their continued selection for such critical work suggests a generally satisfactory performance record. Further analysis would involve examining past performance reviews and any documented issues or commendations on previous DoD contracts.

How does the $44.5 million value compare to similar mission systems test and evaluation contracts?

The $44.5 million contract value for approximately three years of support for mission systems test and evaluation is within the expected range for specialized defense services. Contracts of this nature often involve complex technical requirements, highly skilled personnel, and significant testing infrastructure. Benchmarking against similar contracts awarded by the Navy or other branches for comparable systems (e.g., aircraft, naval systems, or command and control) reveals that values can range widely, from a few million to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the scope, duration, and criticality. This particular contract appears to be a mid-to-large size award for its category, reflecting a substantial but not extraordinary investment in ensuring the effectiveness of key defense systems.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this service?

The primary risk with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, like this one, is the potential for cost overruns if not managed diligently. While the 'fixed fee' component provides the contractor with a predetermined profit, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor's allowable costs. This structure can incentivize contractors to incur higher costs, as their fee is fixed regardless of the total cost. For the government, this necessitates robust oversight, detailed cost tracking, and stringent auditing to ensure that all costs are reasonable, allocable, and necessary. Without effective management, the total contract cost could exceed initial estimates, diminishing the overall value for money.

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

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in defense engineering services. By allowing all responsible sources to compete, the government maximizes the pool of potential offerors, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. This process allows the contracting agency to solicit proposals, evaluate them based on defined criteria (including price and technical merit), and select the offer that represents the best overall value. While it requires more upfront effort in terms of solicitation and evaluation, it significantly reduces the risk of paying inflated prices or receiving substandard services that can occur with sole-source or limited competitions.

What is the historical spending trend for similar engineering services contracts by the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending by the Department of the Navy on engineering services, particularly those related to test and evaluation, has been substantial and generally increasing over the past decade, driven by modernization efforts and the sustainment of complex platforms. The Navy consistently awards billions of dollars annually across various engineering disciplines. Spending on mission systems support, specifically, reflects the ongoing need to ensure the operational readiness and technological superiority of naval assets. While this specific $44.5 million contract is a single data point, it aligns with broader trends of significant investment in specialized engineering and technical support required to maintain and advance the Navy's technological edge.

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: N0042118R3001

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 21610 SOUTH ESSEX DR, LEXINGTON PARK, MD, 20653

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: $188,378,159

Exercised Options: $92,962,578

Current Obligation: $44,459,740

Actual Outlays: $-13,130

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 18

Total Subaward Amount: $6,831,425

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017814D7780

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline