DoD's $24.7M engineering services contract with SEACORP, LLC awarded via full and open competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $24,713,266 ($24.7M)
Contractor: Seacorp, LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-04-30
End Date: 2024-01-25
Contract Duration: 5,383 days
Daily Burn Rate: $4.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: TO N00178-04-D-4122-N427
Place of Performance
Location: WOBURN, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01801
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $24.7 million to SEACORP, LLC for work described as: TO N00178-04-D-4122-N427 Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can incentivize cost control but also carries risk. 3. The contract duration is extensive, spanning over 14 years, indicating a long-term need for services. 4. The contract was awarded by the Defense Contract Management Agency, a key oversight body. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to engineering services. 6. The contract has been active for a significant period, with a substantial value.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics. The extensive duration and significant total value suggest a substantial investment by the Department of Defense. However, the lack of specific performance data makes it difficult to definitively assess value for money compared to similar engineering service contracts. Further analysis would require access to the contractor's cost submissions and performance reports to determine if the fixed fee adequately compensated for the services rendered and if the overall cost was reasonable.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under a 'full and open competition' procurement strategy, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific award. While full and open competition is generally preferred for maximizing price discovery and ensuring fair access to government contracts, the limited number of bidders warrants further investigation into potential barriers to entry or market concentration within this specialized engineering services sector.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process like this generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices and encouraging efficiency from contractors. The fact that multiple companies were willing to bid suggests that the government received a range of pricing options, potentially leading to a more cost-effective outcome than a sole-source or limited competition award.
Public Impact
The Department of Defense benefits from specialized engineering services essential for its operations. The contract supports the Defense Contract Management Agency's oversight and support functions. The services delivered likely contribute to the maintenance and development of defense systems. The contract's long duration implies a sustained need for these engineering capabilities within the defense sector. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around defense installations and agency offices, though specific locations are not detailed.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
- The extended duration of the contract (over 14 years) raises questions about long-term cost-effectiveness and potential for scope creep.
- Limited competition (2 bids) may indicate potential market limitations or barriers to entry for other qualified firms.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, which is a positive indicator for fair market practices.
- The contract is managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency, suggesting a level of established oversight.
- The contractor, SEACORP, LLC, has secured a significant, long-term contract, implying a degree of established capability and trust.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector is characterized by specialized expertise and often involves complex projects requiring deep technical knowledge. Government spending in this area is substantial, supporting national defense, infrastructure development, and research initiatives. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale engineering service contracts awarded by federal agencies, particularly within the Department of Defense, to assess pricing and scope.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. However, as a large prime contract, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors if SEACORP, LLC chooses to engage them. The extent of such subcontracting would depend on the prime contractor's business strategy and any flow-down requirements.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract is primarily managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) necessitates careful monitoring of costs and adherence to the fixed fee. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, but detailed performance and cost data may be less accessible to the public. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically fall under the Department of Defense's IG, who can investigate allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Contract Management Agency Operations
- Engineering and Technical Services
- Department of Defense Procurement
- Long-Term Service Contracts
Risk Flags
- Extended contract duration may increase risk of cost escalation.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
- Limited number of bidders in a full and open competition could indicate market concentration.
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, engineering-services, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, defense-contract-management-agency, long-term-contract, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, massachusetts, delivery-order
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $24.7 million to SEACORP, LLC. TO N00178-04-D-4122-N427
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SEACORP, LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $24.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-04-30. End: 2024-01-25.
What is SEACORP, LLC's track record with government contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?
SEACORP, LLC has a history of securing government contracts, primarily within the defense sector. While specific details on their entire contract portfolio require deeper database access, their ability to win a long-term, high-value contract like this one from the Department of Defense suggests a demonstrated capability and a positive performance history. Analyzing their past performance ratings, any contract disputes, and the types of services they have previously provided would offer a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and expertise. Their sustained engagement with the DoD indicates a level of trust and competence in delivering required services, though a full assessment would necessitate reviewing their complete federal contracting history.
How does the total contract value of $24.7 million compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the DoD?
The total contract value of $24.7 million for engineering services over a period exceeding 14 years positions this as a significant, albeit not exceptionally large, contract within the Department of Defense's extensive procurement landscape. Many DoD engineering contracts can range from a few million to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the scope, duration, and complexity of the services required. This contract's value is substantial enough to indicate a consistent need for specialized engineering support over a prolonged period. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to benchmark against contracts with similar NAICS codes (541330), contract types (Cost Plus Fixed Fee), and durations awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies in recent years. Without such granular data, it's fair to say it represents a moderate to significant investment in engineering capabilities.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this magnitude and duration?
The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this magnitude and duration revolve around cost control and contractor incentive. For the government, the risk is that the contractor may not be sufficiently incentivized to control costs, as the fee is fixed regardless of the actual expenses incurred (within allowable costs). This can lead to cost overruns if the contractor's estimates are inaccurate or if unforeseen issues arise. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating costs, which could erode their profit margin if the fixed fee does not adequately cover their expenses. The extended duration amplifies these risks, as changes in market conditions, technology, or project scope over 14 years can significantly impact cost estimations and the value of the fixed fee. Robust oversight and clear performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks.
What does the limited number of bids (2) for this 'full and open competition' contract imply about the market for these engineering services?
The submission of only two bids for a contract designated as 'full and open competition' suggests potential limitations or specific characteristics of the market for these particular engineering services. This could indicate a highly specialized niche where only a few firms possess the requisite expertise, certifications, or past performance. Alternatively, it might point to high barriers to entry, such as significant upfront investment in technology or personnel, or complex pre-qualification requirements. It could also reflect the specific geographic or technical scope of the requirement, which may not appeal to a broader range of potential bidders. While two bidders still represent competition, it is less robust than ideal and warrants consideration of market dynamics and potential consolidation within this service area.
How has federal spending on engineering services (NAICS 541330) trended over the past decade, and where does this contract fit in?
Federal spending on engineering services, categorized under NAICS code 541330, has generally seen a consistent demand, particularly driven by national defense, infrastructure projects, and research and development initiatives. Over the past decade, spending in this sector has fluctuated based on budgetary priorities and economic conditions, but it remains a significant portion of the federal procurement budget. This $24.7 million contract, awarded over a long duration, represents a steady, long-term investment within this broader spending trend. It aligns with the Department of Defense's continuous need for specialized engineering support for its complex systems and operations. While not a massive outlier, its sustained nature makes it a notable component of ongoing federal engineering service expenditures.
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: N0002408R3009
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 62 JOHNNY CAKE HILL RD, MIDDLETOWN, RI, 02842
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $26,556,640
Exercised Options: $26,504,823
Current Obligation: $24,713,266
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4122
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-04-30
Current End Date: 2024-01-25
Potential End Date: 2024-01-25 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2024-03-04
More Contracts from Seacorp, LLC
- Code 34 Support TAS::97 0100::TAS — $121.1M (Department of Defense)
- Code 34 Technical Support Igf::ot::igf — $86.4M (Department of Defense)
- Conform Platform Engineering, Advanced System Engineering, Technical, and Test and Evaluation Services for Development, Evaluation, Modernization, and Sustainment of the U.S. Navy and Royal Australian Navy Submarine Platforms — $69.7M (Department of Defense)
- Electromagnetic Maneuver Warfare Modular Suite (emwms) — $59.8M (Department of Defense)
- Strike Engineering and Tech. Support Services (code 25) — $57.0M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)