DoD's $13.5M Flight Training Contract with Embry-Riddle: A 5-Year Firm Fixed Price Agreement
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $13,492,325 ($13.5M)
Contractor: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2002-10-01
End Date: 2007-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $7.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Place of Performance
Location: USAF ACADEMY, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80840
State: Colorado Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $13.5 million to EMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Significant contract value of $13.5 million over 5 years. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract is for flight training services, a critical component for the Air Force. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type aims to control costs for the government.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's firm fixed price structure suggests a focus on cost control. Benchmarking against similar flight training contracts would provide a clearer picture of value, but the competitive award indicates a reasonable price was likely achieved.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The use of full and open competition is a positive indicator for price discovery. This method allows all eligible contractors to bid, fostering a competitive environment that typically drives down prices and ensures the government receives best value.
Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award likely resulted in a fair price, maximizing the value of taxpayer dollars spent on essential flight training.
Public Impact
Ensures continued readiness and skill development for Air Force pilots. Supports a key educational institution in aviation. Provides long-term training capabilities for a critical military function.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Contract duration of 5 years may not align with evolving training needs.
- Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess training effectiveness.
- Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs despite fixed price.
Positive Signals
- Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty.
- Full and open competition suggests a competitive and potentially cost-effective award.
- Long-term commitment allows for stable planning and execution of training programs.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on specialized training. Benchmarks for similar flight training contracts would be necessary for a precise comparison, but the value appears substantial for a 5-year duration.
Small Business Impact
The data does not indicate if small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.
Oversight & Accountability
The firm fixed price contract and full and open competition suggest a degree of oversight in the initial award. However, ongoing monitoring of performance and adherence to training standards would be crucial for accountability.
Related Government Programs
- Flight Training
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Department of the Air Force Programs
Risk Flags
- Contract duration may exceed current operational needs.
- Lack of detailed performance metrics.
- Potential for scope creep impacting fixed price.
- Limited visibility into small business participation.
Tags
flight-training, department-of-defense, co, dca, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $13.5 million to EMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is EMBRY-RIDDLE AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $13.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2002-10-01. End: 2007-09-30.
What is the specific curriculum and training standard being provided under this contract, and how does it align with current Air Force operational requirements?
The provided data does not detail the specific curriculum or training standards. This information is crucial for assessing the contract's effectiveness in meeting the Air Force's evolving operational needs. A review of the contract's statement of work would be necessary to understand the precise training objectives and methodologies employed.
How does the per-student training cost compare to industry benchmarks for similar flight training programs, considering the fixed-price nature of the contract?
Without specific per-unit cost data or detailed breakdowns of the firm fixed price, a direct comparison to industry benchmarks is challenging. While the full and open competition suggests a competitive price was sought, the actual value for money depends on the quality and scope of training delivered relative to market rates for comparable services.
What mechanisms are in place to ensure the quality and effectiveness of the flight training provided, beyond the initial competitive award?
The contract's fixed-price nature and competitive award provide initial cost assurance. However, ongoing quality assurance mechanisms, such as performance reviews, student feedback, and adherence to established training protocols, are essential to guarantee the effectiveness of the flight training and the development of skilled pilots.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Educational Services › Technical and Trade Schools › Flight Training
Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Contractor Details
Address: 600 S CLYDE MORRIS BLVD, DAYTONA BEACH, FL, 06
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2002-10-01
Current End Date: 2007-09-30
Potential End Date: 2010-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2009-11-19
More Contracts from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Inc.
- Cmel Renewal Lease - Funding IS Provided for the Period August 22, 2007 Through September 30, 2007 — $11.7M (Department of Transportation)
- Base Year - Aviation Maint — $7.4M (Department of Defense)
View all Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Inc. federal contracts →
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)