M.C. Dean secures $12.3M Navy contract for USS Cape St. George modernization, highlighting engineering services demand

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,324,803 ($12.3M)

Contractor: M. C. Dean, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-08-25

End Date: 2025-09-15

Contract Duration: 1,847 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: USS CAPE ST GEORGE INSTALL

Place of Performance

Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92152

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.3 million to M. C. DEAN, INC. for work described as: USS CAPE ST GEORGE INSTALL Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Engineering services are critical for maintaining and upgrading naval assets. 3. The contract duration of over 1800 days indicates a significant, long-term project. 4. The award value of $12.3 million falls within a moderate spending range for such specialized services. 5. The use of a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract type suggests a focus on performance and cost control. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates a focus on large, specialized contractors.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12.3 million for engineering services related to a naval vessel modernization appears reasonable given the project's scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar naval modernization projects would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The CPIF contract type allows for shared savings, incentivizing the contractor to manage costs effectively, which is a positive indicator for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this specialized engineering service. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and achieving a fair market price.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best value and price for essential naval modernization services.

Public Impact

The U.S. Navy benefits from the modernization and maintenance of the USS Cape St. George. Specialized engineering services are delivered to ensure the operational readiness of naval assets. The primary geographic impact is likely within naval facilities or shipyards where the work is performed, potentially in California. The contract supports skilled engineering and technical jobs within the defense sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in CPIF contracts if not closely managed.
Reliance on a single contractor for a significant duration could pose risks if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process.
CPIF contract structure incentivizes cost efficiency and performance.
Long contract duration suggests a stable, ongoing need for these critical services.

Sector Analysis

The defense engineering services sector is a significant market driven by the need for advanced technological solutions and maintenance for military assets. This contract falls within the broader category of professional, scientific, and technical services, specifically focusing on engineering. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining national security and the operational readiness of military equipment, with contracts often involving complex systems and long-term support.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, M. C. Dean, Inc., is likely a large business capable of handling the full scope of work. The absence of small business participation could limit opportunities for smaller firms in this specific contract's ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting officers and program managers. Performance monitoring, adherence to contract terms, and financial accountability are standard oversight mechanisms. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense may also conduct audits or investigations to ensure proper use of funds and contractor performance.

Related Government Programs

Naval Vessel Maintenance and Modernization Programs
Defense Engineering Services Contracts
Shipbuilding and Repair Contracts
Department of Defense IT and Engineering Support

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns in CPIF contracts
Contractor performance risk over long duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.3 million to M. C. DEAN, INC.. USS CAPE ST GEORGE INSTALL

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is M. C. DEAN, 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 $12.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-08-25. End: 2025-09-15.

What is M. C. Dean, Inc.'s track record with similar naval engineering contracts?

M. C. Dean, Inc. has a substantial history of performing complex engineering and integration services for government and military clients, including extensive work with the Department of Defense and the Navy. They are known for their capabilities in electrical, mechanical, and systems engineering, often undertaking large-scale projects involving critical infrastructure and specialized platforms. While specific details on past naval vessel modernization contracts would require deeper analysis of contract databases, their general profile suggests they are a capable incumbent for such work. Their performance on previous contracts, including adherence to schedules, budget management, and technical execution, would be key factors in their selection for the USS Cape St. George project.

How does the $12.3 million award compare to similar naval vessel modernization projects?

The $12.3 million award for the USS Cape St. George modernization falls within a moderate range for specialized engineering services on naval vessels. However, direct comparisons are challenging without knowing the exact scope of work, the specific systems being modernized, and the vessel class. Larger modernization efforts for major warships can range from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars. Smaller, more targeted upgrades or maintenance contracts might be in the lower millions. The duration of this contract (over 1800 days) suggests a significant undertaking, making the $12.3 million figure appear potentially cost-effective if it covers extensive engineering and integration services. A detailed benchmark would require analyzing contracts with similar vessel types and modernization objectives.

What are the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract?

The primary risks associated with a CPIF contract, like the one for the USS Cape St. George, revolve around cost control and performance measurement. While CPIF incentivizes the contractor to reduce costs below a target, there's a risk that the target itself might be set too high, or that the contractor may prioritize meeting incentive fee targets over other critical aspects like long-term reliability or innovation. For the government, the risk lies in ensuring the incentive structure is well-defined and that the baseline cost estimates are accurate. Effective oversight is crucial to monitor the contractor's efforts to control costs and achieve performance goals, ensuring that the incentive fee truly drives value and doesn't lead to unintended consequences or excessive profit margins if targets are easily met.

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

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money in defense engineering contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to compete, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices, encourages innovation, and promotes efficiency. The requirement for multiple bidders, as seen with the 3 bidders in this case, increases the likelihood that the government will receive competitive proposals that reflect fair market value. However, the effectiveness also depends on the clarity of the solicitation, the evaluation criteria, and the government's ability to accurately assess proposals. For highly specialized services, the pool of qualified bidders might be limited, potentially reducing the intensity of competition, but full and open competition still provides the best framework for maximizing value.

What are the historical spending patterns for engineering services within the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending patterns for engineering services within the Department of the Navy show a consistent and significant investment in maintaining and modernizing its vast fleet and shore infrastructure. The Navy procures a wide array of engineering services, ranging from ship design and overhaul to advanced systems integration, cybersecurity engineering, and environmental engineering. Spending in this category typically fluctuates based on shipbuilding schedules, major modernization initiatives, and readiness requirements. The total annual expenditure can run into billions of dollars across various contract types and competition levels. Contracts like the one for the USS Cape St. George represent a portion of this larger, ongoing investment aimed at ensuring the Navy's technological superiority and operational capability.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT › INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1765 GREENSBORO STATION PLACE SUITE 1400, TYSONS, VA, 22102

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,324,803

Exercised Options: $12,324,803

Current Obligation: $12,324,803

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 7

Total Subaward Amount: $429,778

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0003919D0022

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline