Communication Technologies, Inc. awarded $22M for Senior Military Science Instructor services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,984,076 ($22.0M)

Contractor: Communication Technologies, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-05-30

End Date: 2008-09-26

Contract Duration: 119 days

Daily Burn Rate: $184.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SENIOR MILITARY SCIENCE INSTRUCTOR-SMSI

Place of Performance

Location: FORT MONROE, HAMPTON (CITY) County, VIRGINIA, 23651

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.0 million to COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC for work described as: SENIOR MILITARY SCIENCE INSTRUCTOR-SMSI Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the duration and services provided. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process. 3. No immediate risk indicators are apparent from the provided data. 4. Services align with professional development training for military personnel. 5. This contract falls within the professional and management development training sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $21.98 million over approximately 119 days (assuming the duration is in days, though it's listed as 119 which is unusually short for a contract of this value and may represent a specific period or task order) suggests a significant investment in specialized training. Benchmarking against similar contracts for senior military science instructors is difficult without more specific service details and duration. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 6 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement, which typically leads to better pricing and service offerings for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs and encouraging innovation among contractors.

Public Impact

Benefits military cadets and officer candidates by providing experienced instructors. Delivers essential training in military science and leadership development. Geographic impact is likely concentrated at the Army training facility where the instructors are deployed. Workforce implications include the employment of experienced military science instructors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition.
Multiple bidders (6) participated, indicating market interest.
Firm Fixed Price contract type offers cost predictability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Professional and Management Development Training sector (NAICS code 611430). This sector includes establishments primarily engaged in providing education and training services, not elsewhere classified. The market for military training is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to developing and maintaining a skilled military force. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for specialized military instruction and training services.

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 for small businesses arising from a set-aside provision. The primary contractor, Communication Technologies, Inc., is likely a larger entity, and the absence of a small business set-aside means opportunities for small business participation would depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting plans, which are not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army contracting and program officials. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract structure, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Training Services
Professional Development Programs
Defense Education Contracts
Instructor Services

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.0 million to COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. SENIOR MILITARY SCIENCE INSTRUCTOR-SMSI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-05-30. End: 2008-09-26.

What is the specific nature of the 'Senior Military Science Instructor' services provided under this contract?

The 'Senior Military Science Instructor-SMSI' designation typically refers to experienced personnel, often former military officers or subject matter experts, who provide instruction and mentorship to cadets or officer candidates in military science, leadership, tactics, and related subjects. These instructors play a crucial role in the development of future military leaders. The specific curriculum and duties would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), outlining lesson plans, training methodologies, evaluation criteria, and any required administrative or advisory functions. Without the SOW, the precise scope of services remains general.

How does the awarded amount of $21,984,076.37 compare to typical spending for similar military instructor contracts?

Comparing the awarded amount requires context regarding the contract's duration, the number of instructors, their qualifications, and the specific training program. The listed duration of 119 days is exceptionally short for a contract of this magnitude, suggesting it might represent a specific task order or a very intensive, short-term training initiative rather than a multi-year program. If this $22 million is for 119 days of service, the daily burn rate is extremely high. However, if 'dur' (duration) is not in days, or if this is a cumulative value over a longer period not fully captured by the provided data, the value proposition changes. Benchmarking requires access to comparable contracts with similar scope, duration, and service levels.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the performance of Communication Technologies, Inc. under this contract?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a Senior Military Science Instructor contract would likely focus on the quality and effectiveness of instruction, adherence to curriculum standards, cadet performance improvement, and overall program success. Specific metrics could include cadet pass rates on examinations, feedback scores from cadets and supervising officers, successful completion of training objectives, and the instructor's ability to foster leadership skills. The government would monitor these KPIs through regular performance reviews, feedback mechanisms, and potentially by tracking cadet progression and retention rates. The firm-fixed-price nature incentivizes the contractor to meet these performance standards efficiently.

What is the track record of Communication Technologies, Inc. in providing similar defense or training services?

Communication Technologies, Inc. (CTI) has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily within the Department of Defense. Analyzing their past performance requires a deeper dive into contract databases to identify the types of services previously rendered, their performance ratings on those contracts, and any history of contract modifications, disputes, or terminations. A positive track record in delivering complex training or technical services would indicate a lower risk for this SMSI contract. Conversely, any history of underperformance or issues on similar contracts would raise concerns about CTI's capability to meet the requirements effectively.

Are there any identified risks associated with this contract, such as contractor performance, cost overruns, or schedule delays?

Based on the provided data, specific risks are not immediately apparent. However, potential risks in any large government contract include contractor performance issues (failure to deliver quality instruction), schedule delays (if the 119-day duration is critical and not met), or unforeseen cost increases (though mitigated by the firm-fixed-price structure). The full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests a competitive market, which can reduce pricing risks. A thorough risk assessment would involve reviewing the contractor's past performance, the complexity of the SOW, and the stability of the program requirements.

How has federal spending in the 'Professional and Management Development Training' sector evolved over the past five years?

Federal spending in the 'Professional and Management Development Training' sector (NAICS 611430) has generally seen consistent demand, driven by the continuous need for skill development across various government agencies, particularly within the Department of Defense for military personnel. While specific year-over-year figures fluctuate based on budgetary priorities and specific program needs, the overall trend indicates sustained investment. Factors influencing spending include national security requirements, technological advancements necessitating new training, and personnel readiness mandates. Analyzing historical data from sources like the USASpending.gov or FPDS would reveal precise trends, including peaks related to major training initiatives or shifts in defense spending priorities.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Business Schools and Computer and Management Training › Professional and Management Development Training

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912SU07R0007

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 14151 NEWBROOK DR STE 400, CHANTILLY, VA, 90

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,984,076

Exercised Options: $21,984,076

Current Obligation: $21,984,076

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912SU07D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline