DoD awards $14.1M for Helicopter Rotor Blades and Drive Mechanisms to Purdy Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,130,670 ($14.1M)

Contractor: Purdy Corporation (3708)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-15

End Date: 2009-03-11

Contract Duration: 908 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200612!004722!2100!W58RGZ!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W58RGZ06D0368 !A!N! !N!0001 ! !20060915!20090930!001141407!001141407!001141407!N!PURDY CORPORATION !586 HILLIARD ST !MANCHESTER !CT!06040!44770!003!09!MANCHESTER !HARTFORD !CONN !+000014130670!N!N!000000000000!1615!HELICOPTER ROTOR BLADES, DRIVE MECHANISMS & COMPON!A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !336413!E! !5!B!M! !C! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!J!2!002!K! !A!N!A! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !B!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: CONNECTICUT

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.1 million to PURDY CORPORATION (3708) for work described as: 200612!004722!2100!W58RGZ!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W58RGZ06D0368 !A!N! !N!0001 ! !20060915!20090930!001141407!001141407!001141407!N!PURDY CORPORATION !586 HILLIARD ST !MANCHESTER !CT!06040!44770!003!09!MANCHESTER !HART… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for critical helicopter components, indicating ongoing defense needs. 2. The award to Purdy Corporation suggests a specialized supplier for aviation parts. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for these specialized components. 4. The sector is dominated by a few key players, potentially limiting future competition.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $14.1 million for helicopter rotor blades and drive mechanisms appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the components. Benchmarking against similar complex aviation parts would provide a more precise assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' suggesting a limited competition scenario. This method may impact price discovery if fewer vendors were considered.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds are being used for essential defense equipment, with the fixed-price contract aiming for cost control.

Public Impact

Ensures continued operational readiness for military helicopters. Supports the supply chain for critical aviation components. Contributes to the specialized manufacturing sector within the defense industry.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Limited competition could lead to higher prices.
  • Dependence on a single supplier for critical parts.
  • Potential for cost overruns if scope changes.

Positive Signals

  • Contract supports essential defense capabilities.
  • Fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
  • Award to a US-based manufacturer.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on aircraft parts. Spending in this area is driven by military modernization and operational requirements, with significant investment in advanced materials and complex systems.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved as subcontractors or if the prime contractor is a small business. Further analysis would be needed to assess small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of Defense, which has established oversight mechanisms for procurement. However, the 'exclusion of sources' aspect warrants scrutiny to ensure fair competition and value.

Related Government Programs

  • Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing
  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Defense Logistics Agency Programs

Risk Flags

  • Limited competition
  • Potential single-source dependency
  • Lack of small business participation data
  • Proprietary technology concerns

Tags

other-aircraft-parts-and-auxiliary-equip, department-of-defense, ct, do, 10m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.1 million to PURDY CORPORATION (3708). 200612!004722!2100!W58RGZ!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W58RGZ06D0368 !A!N! !N!0001 ! !20060915!20090930!001141407!001141407!001141407!N!PURDY CORPORATION !586 HILLIARD ST !MANCHESTER !CT!06040!44770!003!09!MANCHESTER !HARTFORD !CONN !+000014130670!N!N!000000000000!1615!HELICOPTER ROTOR BLADES, DRIVE MECHANISMS & COMPON!A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !336413!E! !5!B!M! !C! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PURDY CORPORATION (3708).

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Logistics Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-15. End: 2009-03-11.

What was the rationale for excluding other sources in the competition?

The rationale for excluding other sources in this 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award needs further investigation. Typically, such exclusions are based on specific technical requirements, proprietary technology, or unique capabilities that only a limited number of vendors possess. Understanding this justification is crucial for assessing whether the competition was truly optimized for value and innovation.

What is the long-term risk associated with relying on Purdy Corporation for these critical components?

The long-term risk associated with relying on Purdy Corporation involves potential supply chain disruptions if the company faces financial difficulties or production issues. Additionally, a lack of robust competition could lead to price increases over time. Diversifying the supplier base or developing alternative sources for these critical helicopter parts would mitigate these risks.

How effectively does this contract ensure the best value for taxpayer dollars?

The effectiveness in ensuring best value is partially addressed by the firm fixed-price contract type, which caps costs. However, the limited competition aspect raises questions about whether alternative vendors could have offered lower prices or superior technology. A post-award analysis comparing the awarded price to market benchmarks and the performance of the delivered components is necessary for a full assessment.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingAerospace Product and Parts ManufacturingOther Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 586 HILLIARD ST, MANCHESTER, CT, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W58RGZ06D0368

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2006-09-15

Current End Date: 2009-03-11

Potential End Date: 2009-03-11 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2010-11-13

More Contracts from Purdy Corporation (3708)

View all Purdy Corporation (3708) federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending