DoD's $37M contract with University of Alabama for Missile & Space Systems R&D shows questionable value and limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,102,562 ($22.1M)

Contractor: Board of Trustees, University

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2001-03-30

End Date: 2014-03-31

Contract Duration: 4,749 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200106!001639!2100!AH01 !USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!DAAH0101CR160 !A!N!*!N! !20010330!20040331!198601304!198601304!045632635!N!BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNIVERSITY !301 SPARKMAN DR NW !HUNTSVILLE !AL!35805!37000!089!01!HUNTSVILLE !MADISON !ALABAMA !+000000159981!N!N!000000000000!R799!OTHER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !D !N!S!1!001!N!1B!C!Y!Z! ! !N!V!N! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35805

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.1 million to BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNIVERSITY for work described as: 200106!001639!2100!AH01 !USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!DAAH0101CR160 !A!N!*!N! !20010330!20040331!198601304!198601304!045632635!N!BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNIVERSITY !301 SPARKMAN DR NW !HUNTSVILLE !AL!35805!37000!089!01!HUNTSVILLE !MADIS… Key points: 1. The contract awarded to the University of Alabama for Missile and Space Systems R&D appears to have questionable value given the lack of detailed performance metrics. 2. Competition was limited, with the contract being 'NOT COMPETED', raising concerns about price discovery and potential overpayment. 3. The risk of poor performance is moderate, as the contract type is 'COST NO FEE', but oversight is crucial. 4. This spending falls under the Research and Development sector, specifically within IT and Defense-related areas.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $37 million over its extended period (2001-2014) lacks clear performance metrics or benchmarks for assessing value. Without defined deliverables or success criteria, it's difficult to ascertain if the cost aligns with expected outcomes.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was 'NOT COMPETED', indicating a sole-source or limited competition scenario. This significantly impacts price discovery, as there was no market pressure to ensure the most cost-effective solution was obtained.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition and potentially inflated costs due to limited price discovery represent a suboptimal use of taxpayer funds.

Public Impact

Missile and Space Systems R&D funding impacts national security and technological advancement. University research contracts can foster innovation but require rigorous oversight to ensure public benefit. Long contract durations, like this one spanning over a decade, necessitate continuous monitoring for relevance and efficiency.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Lack of competition
  • Unclear performance metrics
  • Extended contract duration without clear justification

Positive Signals

  • Supports R&D in critical defense areas
  • Partnership with academic institution

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on missile and space systems. Spending in this area is critical for national defense and technological advancement, but often involves high costs and long development cycles.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication in the provided data that small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'NOT COMPETED' status and extended duration suggest a need for robust oversight to ensure the contract remains aligned with evolving defense needs and that funds are used efficiently.

Related Government Programs

  • Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

  • Lack of competition
  • Potential for cost overruns
  • Difficulty in measuring ROI
  • Extended contract duration

Tags

research-and-development-in-the-physical, department-of-defense, al, definitive-contract, 10m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.1 million to BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNIVERSITY. 200106!001639!2100!AH01 !USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!DAAH0101CR160 !A!N!*!N! !20010330!20040331!198601304!198601304!045632635!N!BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNIVERSITY !301 SPARKMAN DR NW !HUNTSVILLE !AL!35805!37000!089!01!HUNTSVILLE !MADISON !ALABAMA !+000000159981!N!N!000000000000!R799!OTHER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!A!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNIVERSITY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2001-03-30. End: 2014-03-31.

What specific research outcomes or technological advancements were achieved with the $37 million investment in missile and space systems R&D?

The provided data does not detail the specific research outcomes or technological advancements resulting from this contract. Further investigation into contract performance reports and project milestones would be necessary to assess the tangible benefits derived from the $37 million expenditure.

Given the 'NOT COMPETED' status, what was the justification for not seeking competitive bids for these missile and space systems R&D services?

The justification for the 'NOT COMPETED' status is not provided in the data. Typically, such designations require a documented rationale, such as the existence of a unique capability, urgent need, or proprietary technology held by the sole source. Without this information, it's impossible to evaluate the necessity of foregoing competition.

How was the 'COST NO FEE' contract type managed to ensure effective resource allocation and prevent cost overruns, despite the lack of a profit motive for the contractor?

A 'COST NO FEE' contract type means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs but receives no fee. Effective management would rely heavily on stringent cost accounting standards, detailed audits, and clear contractual limitations on allowable expenses to prevent overspending and ensure resources are directed towards the research objectives.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesScientific Research and Development ServicesResearch and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 301 SPARKMAN DR NW, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35805

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline

Start Date: 2001-03-30

Current End Date: 2014-03-31

Potential End Date: 2014-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2022-03-24

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending