Raytheon Company awarded $38.8M contract for TRADOC SIM OPERATORS, supporting Army training

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $38,838,951 ($38.8M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-05-01

End Date: 2011-03-25

Contract Duration: 693 days

Daily Burn Rate: $56.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 1290, BCTC, TRADOC SIM OPERATORS

Place of Performance

Location: SPARTA, MONROE County, WISCONSIN, 54656, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Wisconsin Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $38.8 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: 1290, BCTC, TRADOC SIM OPERATORS Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in simulation operations for Army training. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are assessed to understand pricing efficiency. 3. Risk indicators are evaluated based on contractor performance and contract type. 4. Performance context is provided by comparing to similar simulation and training contracts. 5. Sector positioning highlights the role of simulation technology in modern military training. 6. The contract's fixed-price nature aims to control costs for the government.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $38.8 million for TRADOC SIM OPERATORS appears reasonable given the scope of simulation operations for a major military branch. Benchmarking against similar contracts for training support and simulation services would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an effort to establish clear cost expectations upfront, which is generally positive for government spending.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, full and open competition is the preferred method for ensuring a fair and transparent process and maximizing the pool of potential offerors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and innovative solutions, ensuring the government receives the best value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army's Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) personnel who receive enhanced simulation-based training. Services delivered include the operation and maintenance of simulation systems crucial for realistic training scenarios. The geographic impact is centered around TRADOC facilities, likely across multiple Army posts. Workforce implications involve skilled personnel required to operate and support complex simulation equipment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs despite fixed-price contract.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical training simulation operations.
Risk of vendor lock-in if specialized knowledge is not adequately transferred.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
Contract awarded to a well-established defense contractor with relevant experience.

Sector Analysis

The defense simulation and training sector is a critical component of military readiness, encompassing a wide range of technologies from virtual reality to complex live-fire simulators. This contract fits within the broader market for defense training services, which is substantial, driven by the need for realistic and cost-effective training solutions. Spending in this area is often characterized by long-term contracts due to the specialized nature of the equipment and services required.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a specific small business set-aside. While the prime contractor, Raytheon Company, is a large business, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors. The extent of small business subcontracting would depend on Raytheon's procurement practices and the specific requirements of the contract, which are not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program executive office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Army Training Support
Simulation and Training Systems
Defense Contractor Services
Military Readiness Programs

Risk Flags

Contract duration aligns with typical simulation support cycles.
Firm Fixed Price contract type generally offers good cost control.
Full and Open Competition indicates a competitive bidding process.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $38.8 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. 1290, BCTC, TRADOC SIM OPERATORS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $38.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-05-01. End: 2011-03-25.

What is Raytheon Company's track record with similar Department of Defense simulation contracts?

Raytheon Company, now part of RTX, has a long and extensive history of providing simulation and training solutions to the Department of Defense across various branches. They have been involved in numerous contracts for flight simulators, combat training systems, and virtual environments. Their experience spans decades, encompassing the development, integration, and sustainment of complex training platforms. Analyzing their past performance on similar fixed-price contracts, particularly those involving operational support and maintenance of simulation systems, would reveal their ability to deliver within budget and schedule. Past performance reviews and contract close-out data from the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or other government databases can offer insights into their reliability and effectiveness in fulfilling such requirements.

How does the $38.8 million award compare to other TRADOC simulation operator contracts?

Comparing the $38.8 million award for TRADOC SIM OPERATORS requires identifying contracts with similar scope, duration, and service requirements within the Army's Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) or other military training commands. The contract duration of approximately two years (May 2009 to March 2011) suggests an annual value of roughly $19.4 million. This figure can be benchmarked against other contracts for operating and maintaining simulation facilities, which can vary significantly based on the complexity of the simulators, the number of personnel required, and the geographic locations supported. Without specific comparable contract data, it's challenging to definitively state if this award represents a high, low, or average value. However, the firm fixed-price nature indicates an expectation of cost control by the government.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract for simulation operations?

The primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price (FFP) contract for simulation operations, like the TRADOC SIM OPERATORS award to Raytheon, revolve around potential cost overruns for the contractor and scope creep for the government. For the contractor (Raytheon), underestimating the labor hours, material costs, or unforeseen technical challenges in operating and maintaining complex simulation systems could lead to reduced profit margins or even losses. For the government, the risk lies in the contractor potentially cutting corners on service quality or maintenance to protect their profit margin if costs escalate beyond initial projections. Additionally, if the government requires changes or enhancements to the simulation services beyond the original scope, managing those changes under an FFP contract can be complex and may lead to disputes or costly change orders if not handled carefully through the contract modification process.

What is the expected program effectiveness based on the contract details?

The expected program effectiveness hinges on the successful operation and maintenance of simulation systems, which are critical for providing realistic training environments for Army personnel. A contract for 'TRADOC SIM OPERATORS' implies that the contractor is responsible for the day-to-day functioning of these simulators, ensuring they are available, reliable, and accurately represent training scenarios. The firm fixed-price nature suggests the government expects a defined level of service for a set cost, aiming for predictable training outcomes. Effectiveness would be measured by factors such as simulator uptime, fidelity of training scenarios, user satisfaction among trainees and instructors, and ultimately, the contribution to soldier readiness. The award to a large, experienced contractor like Raytheon suggests an expectation of competent execution, but actual effectiveness depends on ongoing performance monitoring and management.

How has federal spending on defense simulation and training evolved since this contract was awarded?

Federal spending on defense simulation and training has generally seen significant growth and evolution since this contract was awarded in 2009. Driven by advancements in technology (e.g., AI, VR/AR, cloud computing), the increasing complexity of modern warfare, and a desire for more cost-effective training solutions compared to live exercises, the market has expanded. Investments have shifted towards more immersive, data-driven, and networked training environments. While specific figures fluctuate annually based on defense budgets and strategic priorities, the overall trend indicates a sustained and often increasing allocation of resources to simulation and training capabilities across all military branches. This includes not only hardware but also sophisticated software, virtual environments, and data analytics for performance assessment.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2603 CHALLENGER CT STE150, ORLANDO, FL, 32826

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,838,951

Exercised Options: $38,838,951

Current Obligation: $38,838,951

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W900KK07D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline