DoD's $29M R&D contract for advanced missile defense tech shows fair competition and positive contractor performance

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,988,530 ($29.0M)

Contractor: Frontier Technology Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-09-28

End Date: 2017-09-27

Contract Duration: 730 days

Daily Burn Rate: $39.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF SBIR PHASE III R&D AND COMMERCIALIZATION

Place of Performance

Location: GOLETA, SANTA BARBARA County, CALIFORNIA, 93117

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.0 million to FRONTIER TECHNOLOGY INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF SBIR PHASE III R&D AND COMMERCIALIZATION Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process. 2. Contractor has a history of successful R&D projects, suggesting technical capability. 3. Pricing appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar R&D efforts. 4. Project aligns with strategic defense priorities, addressing critical national security needs. 5. Performance period of two years allows for focused development and testing. 6. No small business set-aside, but potential for subcontracting opportunities exists.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $29 million for R&D in advanced missile defense appears reasonable when compared to similar government contracts for specialized research. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure allows for flexibility while maintaining cost control. Benchmarking against other R&D contracts in the physical sciences sector suggests that the pricing is competitive and reflects the specialized nature of the work. The contractor's track record further supports the assessment of good value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. The specific exclusion of sources suggests a potential for specialized capabilities required, but the 'full and open' aspect implies a broad solicitation. The presence of competition generally leads to better price discovery and ensures that the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award suggests taxpayers benefit from a more efficient allocation of funds, as multiple firms vied to provide the best technical solution at a competitive price.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and national security, through advancements in missile defense capabilities. Services delivered include research and development focused on physical and engineering sciences related to missile defense. Geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting domestic defense innovation. Workforce implications include highly skilled scientists, engineers, and technicians involved in cutting-edge R&D.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in cost-plus contracts if not closely monitored.
Dependence on a single contractor for specialized R&D could pose a risk if performance falters.

Positive Signals

Contractor's established expertise in R&D suggests a high likelihood of successful project completion.
Award through full and open competition indicates a competitive environment that should drive quality and efficiency.
Clear alignment with critical defense objectives ensures the R&D efforts are strategically important.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical and engineering sciences. The market for advanced defense technologies, including missile defense, is highly specialized and often dominated by a few key players. Government spending in this area is crucial for maintaining technological superiority and national security. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale R&D contracts awarded by defense agencies for similar technological advancements.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the data indicates the prime contractor is not a small business. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans, but given the nature of R&D, there may be opportunities for specialized small businesses to participate in subcontracting roles, particularly in niche technological areas.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight is typically managed by the contracting agency (Department of Defense, Missile Defense Agency) through contract officers and technical representatives. Accountability measures are built into the cost-plus-fixed-fee structure, requiring detailed reporting and justification of costs. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases, though specific technical details of the R&D may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) Contracts
Department of Defense Research and Development Programs
Strategic Defense Initiative Research

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns in CPFF contract
Technical feasibility risks in advanced R&D
Dependence on contractor's specialized expertise

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.0 million to FRONTIER TECHNOLOGY INC. IGF::OT::IGF SBIR PHASE III R&D AND COMMERCIALIZATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FRONTIER TECHNOLOGY INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-09-28. End: 2017-09-27.

What is the contractor's specific track record with the Missile Defense Agency and similar R&D projects?

Frontier Technology Inc. has a history of engaging in research and development contracts, particularly within the defense sector. While specific project details and performance metrics with the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) are not fully detailed in this summary, the award of this Phase III SBIR contract suggests a successful prior completion of earlier SBIR phases, which are designed to transition promising R&D into practical applications. Phase III contracts are typically awarded to companies that have demonstrated significant progress and potential for commercialization or further development. Benchmarking against other R&D contracts awarded by the MDA would provide further context on their performance relative to peers, but the continuation of funding implies a positive assessment of their capabilities and past results.

How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) compare to other R&D contracts of similar scope?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure is common for R&D contracts where the scope of work can be difficult to define precisely at the outset, and innovation is a key objective. This structure allows the contractor to recover all allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility for the contractor to explore novel solutions but requires robust government oversight to manage costs effectively. Benchmarking against similar R&D efforts by the Missile Defense Agency or other defense entities would reveal if the fixed fee and overall cost ceiling are competitive. Generally, CPFF is considered appropriate when risks are high and innovation is paramount, but it necessitates diligent monitoring to ensure value for taxpayer money.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this R&D contract?

While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, R&D contracts of this nature typically focus on achieving specific technical milestones, demonstrating proof-of-concept for new technologies, and potentially developing prototypes. For a missile defense R&D project, KPIs might include metrics related to the effectiveness of a new sensor, the speed of a processing algorithm, the accuracy of a predictive model, or the successful integration of a component into a larger system. The 'SBIR PHASE III R&D AND COMMERCIALIZATION' designation suggests that successful transition to a production-ready technology or a viable commercial product is a key overarching goal. The Missile Defense Agency would establish these KPIs, likely involving technical reviews, testing outcomes, and progress reports throughout the contract duration.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar missile defense R&D efforts by the Department of Defense?

The Department of Defense consistently allocates significant funding towards research and development for missile defense systems, recognizing it as a critical national security priority. Historical spending patterns show a multi-billion dollar annual investment across various programs aimed at developing interceptors, sensors, command and control systems, and related technologies. Contracts like this one, valued at approximately $29 million, represent a component of this larger R&D ecosystem. Spending fluctuates based on evolving threats, technological advancements, and strategic priorities. Analyzing broader DoD R&D budgets and specific MDA program funding over several years would reveal trends in investment areas and the typical scale of contracts awarded for advanced technological development.

Are there any identified risks associated with the technology being developed under this contract?

The primary risks associated with developing advanced missile defense technology are inherent to the cutting-edge nature of the work. These include technical risks, such as the possibility that the proposed solutions may not prove feasible or effective under real-world conditions. There are also schedule risks, as R&D projects can encounter unforeseen delays. Furthermore, cost risks exist, particularly with CPFF contracts, where development challenges could lead to increased expenditures. The 'SBIR PHASE III' designation implies that some foundational R&D has already occurred, potentially mitigating some early-stage risks, but the transition to advanced capabilities always carries inherent uncertainties. The Missile Defense Agency would have conducted a risk assessment prior to award.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4141 COLONEL GLENN HWY STE 140, BEAVERCREEK, OH, 45431

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,988,530

Exercised Options: $28,988,530

Current Obligation: $28,988,530

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HQ014715D7007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline