Air Force awards $12.1M contract for CFT support services to Kay and Associates, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,147,640 ($12.1M)

Contractor: KAY and Associates, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-02-01

End Date: 2026-10-31

Contract Duration: 1,003 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: CFT SUPPORT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: BUFFALO GROVE, LAKE County, ILLINOIS, 60089

State: Illinois Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.1 million to KAY AND ASSOCIATES, INC. for work described as: CFT SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value of $12.1 million for CFT support services. 2. Kay and Associates, Inc. is the awarded contractor. 3. The contract is for a period of approximately 3 years. 4. The contract falls under the Aircraft Manufacturing NAICS code. 5. The contract was awarded using full and open competition after exclusion of sources. 6. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price. 7. The contract is a Delivery Order. 8. The contract is being performed in Illinois.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $12.1 million for CFT support services appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized support, though direct comparisons are difficult without more specific service details. The firm fixed-price structure suggests a defined scope, which can aid in cost control. However, the lack of detailed performance metrics or benchmarks makes a definitive value-for-money assessment challenging. Further analysis would require understanding the specific deliverables and comparing them to industry standards for similar support functions.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded using 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' which implies that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources were excluded for specific reasons. The data indicates two bidders were considered. This level of competition, while not as robust as unrestricted full and open competition, suggests some degree of market engagement and price discovery. The exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to understand its impact on the final price and potential for broader competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, even with the exclusion of sources, may have resulted in a higher price for taxpayers than if a wider range of qualified vendors had been allowed to bid without exclusion.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Air Force, receiving critical CFT support services. The services delivered are related to aircraft manufacturing support, crucial for maintaining and operating Air Force assets. The geographic impact is centered in Illinois, where the contract performance is located. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles required for CFT support, potentially benefiting skilled labor in the Illinois region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition method raises questions about potential limitations on competitive pricing and innovation.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the contractor's effectiveness and value for money.
The specific nature of 'CFT support services' is not detailed, hindering a comprehensive understanding of the contract's scope and risks.

Positive Signals

The use of a Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract is a Delivery Order, suggesting it is part of a larger, potentially established, contracting vehicle.
The performance period is clearly defined, allowing for planning and management.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense sector, specifically related to aircraft manufacturing support. The market for such specialized services is often characterized by a limited number of highly qualified contractors due to the technical expertise and security clearances required. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining the operational readiness of military aircraft. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within similar support contracts for Air Force or other Department of Defense aviation programs.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) is false, and there is no indication of a small business set-aside. This suggests that the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal, and there are no explicit subcontracting requirements for small businesses mentioned in this data. Larger prime contractors may engage small businesses in their supply chain, but this contract itself does not appear to be a direct set-aside.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the Firm Fixed Price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is publicly available. The specific Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on the agency and the nature of any potential issues, but the DoD IG would likely have oversight.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance and Repair
Aerospace Engineering Services
Defense Logistics Support
Military Aircraft Parts and Components
Defense Contractor Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Lack of detailed service description hinders value assessment.
Potential for higher costs due to restricted bidder pool.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.1 million to KAY AND ASSOCIATES, INC.. CFT SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KAY AND ASSOCIATES, 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 $12.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-02-01. End: 2026-10-31.

What is the specific nature of the 'CFT support services' being procured under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of 'CFT support services.' CFT typically refers to 'Combat Fighter Trainer' or similar aviation-related training and support functions within the military context. These services could encompass a wide range of activities, including but not limited to, technical support for training equipment, simulation maintenance, curriculum development, logistical support for training platforms, or specialized advisory services related to combat training aircraft. Without further details from the contract's statement of work, it is difficult to ascertain the precise deliverables and their criticality to Air Force operations. This ambiguity makes it challenging to benchmark costs or assess performance effectively.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar CFT support services awarded by the Air Force or other branches?

Benchmarking the pricing for this $12.1 million contract is challenging without more specific details on the scope of 'CFT support services.' The data indicates a Firm Fixed Price contract awarded to Kay and Associates, Inc. for a period of approximately 3 years. To conduct a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify contracts with similar service descriptions, contract types, and performance periods within the Department of Defense. Factors such as the number of aircraft supported, the complexity of the training systems, and the required expertise would significantly influence pricing. A preliminary review of similar defense support contracts suggests that values in the low millions for specialized, multi-year support are not uncommon, but precise value-for-money assessment requires detailed service-level comparisons.

What are the potential risks associated with Kay and Associates, Inc. as a contractor for this type of service?

The provided data does not offer specific insights into Kay and Associates, Inc.'s past performance or track record that would indicate inherent risks for this contract. However, general risks associated with defense support contracts include potential cost overruns (though mitigated by FFP), schedule delays, performance deficiencies, and contractor personnel issues (e.g., security clearance lapses, availability). The 'limited' competition, specifically 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' could also introduce a risk if the excluded sources were highly capable or offered more competitive pricing. A thorough risk assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations, financial stability, and any history of contract disputes or corrective actions related to Kay and Associates, Inc.

What is the historical spending pattern for CFT support services by the Department of the Air Force?

Historical spending on CFT support services by the Department of the Air Force can vary significantly year over year, influenced by modernization programs, fleet readiness requirements, and budget allocations. While this specific $12.1 million award is a single data point, broader trends in defense spending indicate a consistent need for specialized support services to maintain complex military assets. Analyzing historical data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would reveal aggregate spending on related categories (e.g., aircraft maintenance, training support, logistics) over several fiscal years. This analysis could identify fluctuations, major program investments, and key contractors dominating the CFT support landscape, providing context for the current award's significance.

How effective is the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method in ensuring competitive pricing for specialized defense services?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method aims to balance the desire for broad competition with the need to procure specialized services from entities meeting specific, often stringent, requirements. While it allows for more than one bidder, the exclusion of certain sources can limit the competitive pool. This can potentially lead to higher prices compared to unrestricted full and open competition if the excluded entities were significant market players or could offer more competitive terms. The effectiveness in ensuring competitive pricing is therefore contingent on the justification for exclusion and the number and capability of the remaining bidders. In this case, with two bidders considered, the level of competition might be less robust than ideal, potentially impacting price discovery.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 165 N ARLINGTON HEIGHTS RD STE 150, BUFFALO GROVE, IL, 60089

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $16,038,016

Exercised Options: $16,038,016

Current Obligation: $12,147,640

Actual Outlays: $1,329,657

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA810817D0003

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline