DoD Awards $72.6M for Naval ISR Aircraft Support, Raising Questions on Value and Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $72,628,324 ($72.6M)

Contractor: Mantech TSG-2 Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2018-06-25

End Date: 2022-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,650 days

Daily Burn Rate: $44.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: SUPPORT TO NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER CRANE FOR SUSTAINMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF MANNED RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT FOR INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE PLATFORMS IN SUPPORT OF NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND MARITIME PATROL AND RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE MULTI INTELLIGENCE SPECIAL MISSIONS PROGRAM OFFICE 290

Place of Performance

Location: HERNDON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20171

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $72.6 million to MANTECH TSG-2 JOINT VENTURE for work described as: SUPPORT TO NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER CRANE FOR SUSTAINMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF MANNED RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT FOR INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE PLATFORMS IN SUPPORT OF NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND MARITIME PATROL AND RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE MULTI INTELLIG… Key points: 1. Significant investment in critical intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities for naval aviation. 2. Contract awarded to MANTECH TSG-2 JOINT VENTURE, a specific entity, raising questions about broader market competition. 3. Potential for cost overruns given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type. 4. The R&D focus suggests innovation, but the long duration and cost warrant scrutiny.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while allowing for flexibility in R&D, can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts for specialized aircraft support is difficult without more granular data on the specific services provided.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a broad solicitation. However, the specific award to MANTECH TSG-2 JOINT VENTURE implies they were the most competitive offeror. The impact on price discovery is positive due to competition, but the final price reflects the chosen contractor's capabilities and proposed costs.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds are supporting advanced ISR capabilities. While competition was sought, the final cost and value derived from this specific contract will determine the ultimate taxpayer impact.

Public Impact

Enhances national security through improved intelligence gathering for naval operations. Supports technological advancement in manned reconnaissance aircraft. Potential for job creation within the defense and aerospace sectors. Ensures continued operational readiness for critical maritime patrol and reconnaissance missions.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can lead to cost overruns.
Long contract duration (over 4 years) increases risk of scope creep and cost escalation.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes value assessment challenging.
Limited information on small business participation.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition.
Supports critical national security functions.
Focus on R&D for advanced ISR platforms.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically for physical, engineering, and life sciences. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining technological superiority but requires careful oversight to ensure efficiency and value for money, especially in defense applications.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a factor in this contract award (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the prime contractor did not subcontract with small businesses or that the nature of the work did not lend itself to small business involvement.

Oversight & Accountability

The Department of Defense, through the Naval Air Systems Command and supported by the Defense Contract Management Agency, is responsible for oversight. The contract's long duration and CPFF structure necessitate robust oversight to manage costs and ensure deliverables meet requirements.

Related Government Programs

Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
Department of Defense Contracting
Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF structure.
Long contract duration increases risk.
Lack of transparency on specific R&D outcomes.
No reported small business participation.
Complexity of specialized R&D makes oversight challenging.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $72.6 million to MANTECH TSG-2 JOINT VENTURE. SUPPORT TO NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER CRANE FOR SUSTAINMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF MANNED RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT FOR INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE PLATFORMS IN SUPPORT OF NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND MARITIME PATROL AND RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE MULTI INTELLIGENCE SPECIAL MISSIONS PROGRAM OFFICE 290

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MANTECH TSG-2 JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $72.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-06-25. End: 2022-12-31.

What specific technological advancements or sustainment improvements were achieved under this contract, and how do they compare to the initial investment?

The contract aimed to support the sustainment and development of manned reconnaissance aircraft for ISR platforms. Quantifying the exact technological advancements requires a review of contractor deliverables, performance reports, and independent assessments. Comparing these to the $72.6M investment involves evaluating the return on investment in terms of enhanced ISR capabilities, operational effectiveness, and long-term cost savings from improved sustainment.

Given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, what mechanisms were in place to control costs and prevent contractor inefficiencies?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts typically include baseline cost estimates and a fixed fee for the contractor's profit. Oversight mechanisms would involve detailed audits of incurred costs, performance reviews against milestones, and potentially incentive clauses for cost savings or early completion. The effectiveness of these controls depends heavily on the rigor of the Defense Contract Management Agency's monitoring and the clarity of the contract's Statement of Work.

How did the 'full and open competition' process ensure the best value was obtained, considering the specific nature of the R&D required?

Full and open competition theoretically allows all responsible sources to submit proposals, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. For specialized R&D, the evaluation criteria would likely weigh technical approach and past performance heavily alongside cost. The 'best value' is determined by balancing these factors, ensuring the chosen contractor offers the optimal combination of technical capability, risk mitigation, and price for the government's needs.

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: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › OTHER RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: FA807513R0001

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12015 LEE JACKSON HWY, FAIRFAX, VA, 22033

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $74,621,685

Exercised Options: $74,621,685

Current Obligation: $72,628,324

Actual Outlays: $7,201,662

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 91

Total Subaward Amount: $82,584,412

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA807514D0020

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline