MITRE Corporation awarded $20.8M contract for R&D services by FCC, extending collaboration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,830,205 ($20.8M)

Contractor: THE Mitre Corporation

Awarding Agency: Federal Communications Commission

Start Date: 2024-08-01

End Date: 2026-07-31

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: FFRDC - COLLABORATION OF EXPERTISE (COE)

Place of Performance

Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Federal Communications Commission obligated $20.8 million to THE MITRE CORPORATION for work described as: FFRDC - COLLABORATION OF EXPERTISE (COE) Key points: 1. Contract focuses on research and development, leveraging specialized expertise. 2. Sole-source award suggests unique capabilities or established relationship. 3. Duration of 729 days indicates a medium-term project. 4. Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure allows for flexibility but requires careful oversight. 5. Virginia location may imply specific operational or research facilities. 6. No small business set-aside indicates a focus on larger, specialized entities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $20.8 million over approximately two years for R&D services is moderate. Benchmarking this against similar FFRDC contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) pricing structure, while common for R&D, can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. The fixed fee component provides some predictability, but the overall value for money will depend heavily on the successful delivery of research outcomes and the efficiency of the contractor's operations.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, indicating that The MITRE Corporation was identified as the only responsible source capable of fulfilling the requirement. This often occurs with Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) due to their unique mission, expertise, and established relationships with government agencies. While this ensures access to specialized knowledge, it limits the opportunity for competitive bidding and potentially higher price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers do not benefit from the price reductions typically achieved through a competitive bidding process. The agency relies on negotiation and oversight to ensure fair pricing.

Public Impact

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) benefits from access to specialized research and development expertise. Services delivered likely involve advanced technical analysis and recommendations for the FCC's regulatory and operational functions. The geographic impact is primarily centered in Virginia, where the contractor's operations are based. Workforce implications include the engagement of highly skilled researchers and technical professionals.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost creep in CPFF contracts if not rigorously monitored.
Sole-source nature limits price competition, potentially leading to higher costs than a competed contract.
Dependence on a single contractor for specialized R&D may create long-term reliance.

Positive Signals

Leverages established expertise of a known FFRDC contractor.
Contract duration provides stability for focused research efforts.
Clear service area (R&D) for the FCC's mission.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences sector, specifically NAICS code 541715. This sector is critical for technological advancement and innovation across various government functions. FFRDCs like MITRE play a significant role in this space, providing objective, independent research and analysis. Comparable spending in this sector can vary widely based on agency needs, but R&D contracts are often substantial investments in future capabilities.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not competed and did not include a small business set-aside. This is typical for FFRDC engagements where the unique capabilities of the FFRDC are paramount. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting opportunities for small businesses mandated by this award. The impact on the small business ecosystem is indirect, as the focus is on leveraging MITRE's specialized resources rather than fostering broader small business participation through this specific contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will be managed by the Federal Communications Commission. As a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, rigorous financial oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures against the fixed fee and ensure efficient use of funds. Transparency will depend on the FCC's reporting practices and any public disclosures related to the research outcomes. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs)
Research and Development Services
Federal Communications Commission Operations Support
Technology Research and Analysis

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure requires diligent cost oversight.
Potential for contractor complacency due to lack of competition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Federal Communications Commission awarded $20.8 million to THE MITRE CORPORATION. FFRDC - COLLABORATION OF EXPERTISE (COE)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE MITRE CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Federal Communications Commission (Federal Communications Commission).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-08-01. End: 2026-07-31.

What is the historical spending trend between the FCC and The MITRE Corporation?

Analyzing historical spending between the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and The MITRE Corporation requires access to detailed federal procurement databases. Generally, FFRDCs like MITRE are awarded contracts based on specific, often long-term, needs for specialized research and development. The FCC, as a regulatory body for communications technology, frequently requires expert analysis and technical guidance. Therefore, it is plausible that the FCC has engaged MITRE on multiple occasions for various projects. The current $20.8 million contract, spanning approximately two years, represents a significant but not necessarily unprecedented investment. To provide a precise historical trend, one would need to aggregate all prior contract awards, their values, durations, and the nature of services rendered to identify patterns of increasing, decreasing, or stable engagement over time.

How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) compare to other R&D contracts awarded by the FCC?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure is common for research and development contracts, especially those involving uncertainty and evolving requirements, which aligns with the nature of R&D. For the FCC, CPFF allows them to leverage specialized expertise like that of MITRE, where the exact costs of research may be difficult to predict upfront. The 'cost plus' component covers the contractor's allowable expenses, while the 'fixed fee' represents the contractor's profit, negotiated at the outset. Compared to other R&D contracts, CPFF offers a balance between flexibility for the contractor and cost control for the agency, provided robust oversight is in place. Other FCC R&D contracts might utilize different structures like Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) if the scope is very well-defined, or Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) if specific performance targets are critical and incentivized. The choice of CPFF here suggests the FCC prioritized access to MITRE's expertise for potentially complex R&D tasks where precise outcomes and costs were not fully predictable at the time of award.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) expected for this R&D contract?

While specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are not detailed in the provided data, for a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Research and Development (R&D) contract with The MITRE Corporation, the FCC would likely focus on several areas. These would typically include the timely delivery of research milestones and final reports, the quality and technical soundness of the research findings, and adherence to the agreed-upon research plan. For an FFRDC, KPIs might also encompass the objectivity and independence of the analysis provided, and the practical applicability of the recommendations to the FCC's mission. Cost control, while managed through the CPFF structure, would also be indirectly monitored through efficient resource utilization. The fixed fee itself acts as a baseline incentive for the contractor to complete the work within projected parameters, though the primary driver for R&D success is often the intellectual contribution and problem-solving capability.

What is MITRE Corporation's track record with government R&D contracts, particularly with agencies like the FCC?

The MITRE Corporation has an extensive and well-established track record as a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) supporting numerous U.S. government agencies across various domains, including defense, aviation, healthcare, and communications. MITRE operates multiple FFRDCs, each with a specific government sponsor, and is known for providing objective, independent research, development, and systems engineering. Their work often involves tackling complex national challenges and providing technical guidance to policymakers. While specific details of MITRE's past engagements with the FCC are not provided here, their general reputation suggests a history of delivering high-quality R&D services. Agencies typically award sole-source contracts to MITRE when they require its unique, unbiased expertise and long-term strategic support that cannot be readily obtained through traditional competitive procurement.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source R&D contract of this magnitude?

Sole-source R&D contracts, especially those of significant value like $20.8 million, carry inherent risks. A primary concern is the lack of price competition, which can potentially lead to higher costs for the government compared to a competitively bid contract. Taxpayers may not receive the best possible value if alternative solutions or more cost-effective approaches were available but not explored. Another risk is contractor complacency; without the pressure of competition, the contractor might be less motivated to innovate or optimize efficiency. Furthermore, reliance on a single source can create a dependency, making it difficult for the agency to switch providers or adapt if the contractor's performance declines or strategic priorities shift. Robust oversight and clear performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › N – Health R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 273FCC24R0012

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7515 COLSHIRE DR, MC LEAN, VA, 22102

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $59,005,251

Exercised Options: $20,830,205

Current Obligation: $20,830,205

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 3

Total Subaward Amount: $2,232,045

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 75FCMC23D0004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline