DoD's $26.8M EW/Intelligence Systems contract to SEACORP, LLC awarded via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,857,175 ($26.9M)

Contractor: Seacorp, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2018-04-13

End Date: 2025-08-27

Contract Duration: 2,693 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CODE 349 ELECTROMAGNETIC (EM) SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ADVANCE ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) PROGRAMS TO DEVELOP AND FIELD SPECIAL MISSION EW AND INTELLIGENCE AUGMENTATION SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS, SENSORS, AND ASSOCIATED NETWORKS, ONBOARD SUBMARINES AND OTHER PLATFORMS SUCH AS UAV/UUVS.

Place of Performance

Location: MIDDLETOWN, NEWPORT County, RHODE ISLAND, 02842

State: Rhode Island Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.9 million to SEACORP, LLC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CODE 349 ELECTROMAGNETIC (EM) SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ADVANCE ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) PROGRAMS TO DEVELOP AND FIELD SPECIAL MISSION EW AND INTELLIGENCE AUGMENTATION SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS, SENSORS, AND ASSOCIATED NETWORKS, ONBOARD SUBMARINES AND OT… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical Electromagnetic (EM) and Electronic Warfare (EW) systems for submarines and unmanned platforms. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Performance period extends through August 2025, indicating a long-term need for these specialized services. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 5. The contract is not set aside for small businesses, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms. 6. The geographic focus appears to be Rhode Island, based on the state information provided.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar EW/intelligence system development contracts. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces inherent risk for cost control, as contractor profit is fixed while costs can fluctuate. While the total value is substantial, its value-for-money depends heavily on the successful delivery of advanced EW and intelligence systems, which are complex and prone to cost escalation. Further analysis of the contractor's past performance and adherence to budget on similar projects would be beneficial.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specialized requirement. While full and open competition is generally preferred for maximizing price discovery and ensuring fair access, the specific number of bidders (two) might suggest a niche market or high barriers to entry for potential competitors in the advanced EW and intelligence systems domain.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process, even with a limited number of bidders, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging more favorable pricing and ensuring that the government receives services from qualified contractors. However, the true taxpayer benefit is realized through effective cost management and successful program execution.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, specifically naval operations and intelligence gathering capabilities. Services delivered include the development and fielding of advanced EW and intelligence augmentation systems, subsystems, and sensors. The systems are intended for deployment on submarines and other platforms like Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs). This contract supports the modernization of critical defense infrastructure and enhances national security capabilities. It may indirectly benefit the defense technology workforce through employment opportunities in specialized engineering and development roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically focusing on advanced defense technologies related to Electronic Warfare (EW) and intelligence systems. This is a highly specialized niche within the broader defense industrial base, characterized by significant R&D investment, long development cycles, and stringent performance requirements. The market for such systems is dominated by a few key players with deep technical expertise and established relationships with government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to ascertain due to the proprietary and classified nature of many EW/intelligence programs, but significant government investment is consistently directed towards maintaining technological superiority in this domain.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific small business subcontracting requirements indicated in the provided data. This means that prime opportunities are likely focused on larger, established defense contractors. While SEACORP, LLC may engage subcontractors, the absence of a formal set-aside or explicit subcontracting goals suggests that the direct impact on the broader small business defense ecosystem might be limited unless SEACORP proactively includes them in its supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance, compliance, and proper cost accounting. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure necessitates close monitoring of costs and adherence to the fixed fee. Transparency is often limited in defense contracts involving sensitive technologies like EW and intelligence systems. Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse, but day-to-day oversight focuses on performance and financial accountability.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, electronic-warfare, intelligence-systems, submarine-systems, unmanned-vehicles, engineering-services, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, rhode-island, defense-contract-management-agency, advanced-technology

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.9 million to SEACORP, LLC. IGF::CT::IGF ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR CODE 349 ELECTROMAGNETIC (EM) SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ADVANCE ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) PROGRAMS TO DEVELOP AND FIELD SPECIAL MISSION EW AND INTELLIGENCE AUGMENTATION SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS, SENSORS, AND ASSOCIATED NETWORKS, ONBOARD SUBMARINES AND OTHER PLATFORMS SUCH AS UAV/UUVS.

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 $26.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-04-13. End: 2025-08-27.

What is SEACORP, LLC's track record with similar Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts, particularly in EW and intelligence systems?

SEACORP, LLC has a history of performing defense contracts, including those involving complex engineering services. Analyzing their past CPFF contracts would involve reviewing performance reports, cost variances, and any documented issues related to budget adherence or scope management. For EW and intelligence systems, the complexity and evolving threat landscape often lead to contract modifications and potential cost growth. A detailed review of their historical performance on similar projects, including any audits or reviews by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or DCMA, would provide insight into their ability to manage costs effectively under a CPFF structure for these specialized systems.

How does the per-unit cost or overall value of this contract compare to similar EW/intelligence system development contracts awarded by the DoD?

Direct per-unit cost comparisons for specialized EW and intelligence systems are exceptionally difficult due to the unique nature of each system, the varying levels of technological sophistication, and the often classified or proprietary details surrounding development efforts. The total contract value of $26.8 million over approximately three years for developing and fielding systems for submarines and unmanned platforms suggests a significant investment. Benchmarking would require access to data on comparable contracts, considering factors like system complexity, performance requirements, and the specific technologies involved. Without such comparative data, assessing whether this contract represents superior or inferior value is challenging.

What are the primary technical and programmatic risks associated with developing and fielding EW and intelligence systems for submarines and unmanned platforms under this contract?

Key technical risks include the rapid pace of technological evolution in the EW/intelligence domain, the potential for integration challenges with existing submarine and unmanned platform systems, and the inherent difficulty in testing and validating systems in realistic operational environments, especially for submarines. Programmatic risks involve potential cost overruns due to the CPFF structure, schedule delays stemming from technical hurdles or changing requirements, and the possibility of the contractor failing to meet stringent performance specifications. Ensuring effective cybersecurity for these networked systems also presents a significant risk.

How effective are the oversight mechanisms (DCMA, IG) in managing the risks associated with CPFF contracts for advanced defense technologies like those in this award?

Oversight mechanisms like the DCMA play a crucial role in managing CPFF contracts by monitoring contractor expenditures, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and assessing performance. The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) often conducts audits to verify cost allowability and allocability. The Inspector General (IG) provides oversight for fraud, waste, and abuse. However, the effectiveness can be influenced by the complexity of the technology, the availability of skilled auditors and contract specialists, and the level of transparency provided by the contractor. For advanced technologies, the rapid evolution and specialized knowledge required can sometimes challenge even robust oversight frameworks.

What are the historical spending patterns for similar EW and intelligence system development programs within the Department of Defense?

The Department of Defense consistently allocates substantial funding towards Electronic Warfare (EW) and intelligence systems due to their critical role in maintaining information superiority and countering adversary threats. Historical spending patterns show a continuous and often increasing investment in these areas, driven by technological advancements and evolving geopolitical landscapes. Programs range from incremental upgrades to entirely new system developments, with budgets often spanning multiple years and involving various contract types. The overall trend indicates a sustained commitment to developing and fielding cutting-edge capabilities in EW and intelligence, reflecting their strategic importance.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering 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: N6660417R3062

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: $31,039,701

Exercised Options: $31,039,701

Current Obligation: $26,857,175

Actual Outlays: $6,970,420

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: 2018-04-13

Current End Date: 2025-08-27

Potential End Date: 2025-08-27 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-09-16

More Contracts from Seacorp, LLC

View all Seacorp, LLC federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending