KBR WYLE SERVICES awarded $40.7M for Naval Air Systems Command technical training product development

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $40,722,588 ($40.7M)

Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-05-01

End Date: 2025-04-30

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: TECHNICAL TRAINING PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND

Place of Performance

Location: ORANGE PARK, CLAY County, FLORIDA, 32073

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $40.7 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: TECHNICAL TRAINING PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in advanced training solutions. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding process for this requirement. 3. Performance period of five years indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract falls within the Research and Development sector, focusing on physical and engineering sciences. 5. Geographic location in Florida may indicate specific training facility or operational needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $40.7 million over five years for technical training product development appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts for specialized training systems is challenging without more specific service details. However, the fixed-fee component suggests a degree of cost control. Further analysis would require comparing the deliverables and complexity to other training development contracts within the defense sector.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of multiple bidders, though not explicitly stated, is implied by the competition type. This approach generally fosters price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive pricing to secure the award.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is favorable for taxpayers as it is expected to yield the best value through a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to lower overall costs.

Public Impact

Naval Air Systems Command personnel will benefit from enhanced technical training products. The services delivered will support the development of advanced training methodologies and materials. The primary geographic impact is expected to be in Florida, where the contractor is located. This contract supports a specialized workforce within the defense R&D sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Potential for scope creep in R&D projects if requirements are not clearly defined.
  • Reliance on a single contractor for a significant period could limit future innovation if not managed effectively.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
  • Long-term contract duration provides stability for developing and implementing complex training solutions.
  • Focus on product development implies tangible outputs that can be evaluated for effectiveness.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically NAICS code 541715, which covers R&D in physical, engineering, and life sciences. The defense industry heavily invests in R&D for advanced training and simulation technologies to maintain a technological edge. Comparable spending in this area can vary widely based on the complexity and novelty of the research, but significant government contracts are common for developing specialized training products for complex systems like those operated by the Naval Air Systems Command.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large contract awarded under full and open competition, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors to KBR WYLE SERVICES. However, the primary award does not directly benefit small businesses through set-asides.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Naval Air Systems Command, with potential involvement from the Department of Defense's Inspector General for audits and investigations. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type requires careful monitoring of costs and performance to ensure value for money. Transparency is expected through contract reporting mechanisms and performance reviews.

Related Government Programs

  • Naval Air Systems Command Training Programs
  • Defense Research and Development Contracts
  • Technical Training Systems
  • Simulation and Modeling Services

Risk Flags

  • Cost Overruns Risk
  • Scope Creep Potential
  • Technical Feasibility Uncertainty

Tags

research-and-development, department-of-defense, naval-air-systems-command, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-fixed-fee, technical-training, product-development, florida, large-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $40.7 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. TECHNICAL TRAINING PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC.

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 $40.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-05-01. End: 2025-04-30.

What is the track record of KBR WYLE SERVICES in delivering similar technical training products for the Department of Defense?

KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC has a substantial history of performing complex technical services for the Department of Defense, including research, development, and sustainment support. While specific details on 'technical training product development' for naval aviation are not provided in this summary, the company's broader portfolio often includes engineering, scientific, and technical support across various defense platforms. Their experience in R&D and systems integration suggests a capacity to handle such requirements. A deeper dive into their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those involving product development and training systems, would be necessary to fully assess their suitability and past success rates in this specific niche.

How does the $40.7 million contract value compare to similar R&D contracts for training product development within the defense sector?

The $40.7 million value for a five-year contract focused on technical training product development for naval aviation is within a common range for specialized defense R&D efforts. However, direct comparisons are difficult without knowing the exact scope, complexity, and deliverables. Contracts for developing advanced simulation systems, virtual reality training environments, or highly technical instructional materials can vary significantly. Generally, R&D contracts in the defense sector can range from a few million to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the technological advancement and scale. This contract appears to be a mid-to-large size for a specific product development effort within a broader training modernization initiative.

What are the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for R&D?

The primary risks associated with a CPFF contract for R&D, like this one, revolve around cost control and defining the scope. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with a defined profit margin, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses allowable costs. If costs escalate beyond initial projections due to unforeseen technical challenges or scope creep, the government bears the financial burden. For R&D, where innovation and discovery are key, defining the exact scope and deliverables upfront can be challenging, increasing the risk of cost overruns. Effective oversight and clear communication are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the project stays within budget and meets objectives.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' approach likely to be in ensuring value for money for this specific training product development?

The 'full and open competition' approach is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money, as it allows the widest possible pool of qualified contractors to bid. This competition drives down prices and encourages innovation as companies strive to differentiate their offerings. For a technical training product development contract, this means the Naval Air Systems Command likely received multiple proposals addressing the requirement. The agency can then evaluate these proposals not only on price but also on technical merit, past performance, and overall value. While effective, the government must still conduct thorough evaluations to ensure the lowest price doesn't compromise quality or essential capabilities.

What are the historical spending patterns for technical training product development by the Naval Air Systems Command?

Historical spending patterns for technical training product development by the Naval Air Systems Command typically reflect the evolving needs of naval aviation technology and operational requirements. This includes investments in simulation, virtual and augmented reality training, computer-based training modules, and curriculum development for new aircraft and systems. Spending can fluctuate based on modernization cycles, budget allocations, and the introduction of new platforms. While specific aggregate historical data for 'product development' is not provided here, it's understood that the Navy consistently allocates significant resources to ensure its aircrews and maintenance personnel are proficient with the latest technologies and procedures. This $40.7M contract aligns with that ongoing commitment.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTOTHER RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Brown & Root Industrial Services Holdings, LLC

Address: 22309 EXPLORATION DR, LEXINGTON PARK, MD, 20653

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $42,570,641

Exercised Options: $42,570,641

Current Obligation: $40,722,588

Actual Outlays: $1,818,489

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 8

Total Subaward Amount: $2,856,478

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA807518D0015

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2020-05-01

Current End Date: 2025-04-30

Potential End Date: 2025-04-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-12-10

More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC

View all KBR Wyle Services, LLC federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending