DoD's $32.8M R&D Contract with Alpha-Omega Change Engineering Faces Scrutiny for Limited Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $32,813,757 ($32.8M)

Contractor: Alpha-Omega Change Engineering, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-08-29

End Date: 2019-03-25

Contract Duration: 2,034 days

Daily Burn Rate: $16.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF FOR OTHER FUNCTIONS

Place of Performance

Location: KIRTLAND AFB, BERNALILLO County, NEW MEXICO, 87117

State: New Mexico Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $32.8 million to ALPHA-OMEGA CHANGE ENGINEERING, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF FOR OTHER FUNCTIONS Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Alpha-Omega Change Engineering, Inc. for R&D services totals $32.8 million. 2. Competition was limited after exclusion of sources, raising questions about price discovery. 3. The contract duration is 2034 days, indicating a long-term engagement. 4. The 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' sector is broad, making direct benchmarks challenging without further detail.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $32.8M for R&D services is significant. Without specific deliverables or comparable contracts in the niche 'Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' R&D, assessing its value for money is difficult. The fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope, but the long duration warrants closer examination.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that not all potential offerors were considered. This method can limit competition and potentially lead to higher prices if a more competitive process could have been employed.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition raises concerns about whether taxpayers received the best possible price for the research and development services rendered.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may not have received the most competitive pricing due to the limited competition. The long contract duration could tie up significant funds over an extended period. The specific R&D outcomes and their impact on national security or technological advancement are not detailed, making public assessment difficult.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition raises price fairness concerns.
Lack of detailed public information on R&D outcomes.
Long contract duration.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract type can provide cost certainty.
Awarded to a single entity, potentially indicating specialized expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the broad 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' category. Spending in this sector can vary widely based on the specific research area and its strategic importance. Benchmarking is difficult without knowing the precise nature of the R&D.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. Further investigation would be needed to determine if opportunities for small business participation were overlooked.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'exclusion of sources' clause warrants further oversight to ensure it was justified and that the procurement process was fair. Accountability for the R&D outcomes and their alignment with the contract's objectives should be clearly established.

Related Government Programs

Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Air Force Programs

Risk Flags

Limited competition raises concerns about fair pricing.
Lack of transparency regarding specific R&D outcomes.
Potential for missed small business opportunities.
Long contract duration may reduce flexibility and increase risk.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $32.8 million to ALPHA-OMEGA CHANGE ENGINEERING, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF FOR OTHER FUNCTIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALPHA-OMEGA CHANGE ENGINEERING, 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 $32.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-08-29. End: 2019-03-25.

What specific R&D objectives were pursued under this contract, and how do they align with the Department of Defense's strategic goals?

The contract's description 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' is very broad. To assess its value, specific details on the research areas, methodologies, and expected technological advancements are needed. Understanding how these R&D efforts contribute to the Air Force's mission and broader defense objectives is crucial for evaluating the contract's effectiveness and justifying its $32.8 million cost.

Were there any qualified small businesses capable of performing this R&D, and if so, why were they excluded from the competition?

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which inherently limits the pool of potential contractors. It is unclear if small businesses were considered or excluded. A review of the justification for excluding sources is necessary to determine if small business participation was feasible and if opportunities were missed, potentially impacting innovation and economic benefit.

What is the justification for the long contract duration of 2034 days, and how does it impact the overall cost-effectiveness and flexibility of the R&D investment?

A contract duration extending nearly six years (2034 days) for R&D services requires strong justification. Extended timelines can sometimes be necessary for complex, long-term research. However, they also increase the risk of scope creep, technological obsolescence, and reduced flexibility to adapt to new findings or changing priorities. Assessing the cost-effectiveness requires a clear understanding of the phased deliverables and milestones throughout this extended period.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: FA489013R0104

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: CAE Inc (UEI: 202131454)

Address: 6 MANHATTAN SQ STE 100, HAMPTON, VA, 23666

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $32,813,757

Exercised Options: $32,813,757

Current Obligation: $32,813,757

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline