DoD's $20.8M Rotary Wing Integrity Task Order to Mercer University raises questions on competition and value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,811,481 ($20.8M)

Contractor: THE Corporation of Mercer University

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-04-21

End Date: 2026-04-20

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: ROTARY WING INTEGRITY PROGRAMS TASK ORDER

Place of Performance

Location: WARNER ROBINS, HOUSTON County, GEORGIA, 31088

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.8 million to THE CORPORATION OF MERCER UNIVERSITY for work described as: ROTARY WING INTEGRITY PROGRAMS TASK ORDER Key points: 1. Contract awarded without competition, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs. 2. The task order's value is significant within the engineering services sector for this specific niche. 3. Lack of competitive bidding presents a risk indicator for optimal resource allocation. 4. Performance context is tied to the Air Force's broader rotary wing integrity initiatives. 5. This contract positions Mercer University as a key provider in a specialized defense engineering area. 6. The duration of the contract (4 years) suggests a long-term need for these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $20.8 million task order is challenging due to its specialized nature and lack of competitive bidding. Without comparison to similar contracts or market rates for rotary wing integrity engineering services, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing represents good value for money. The 'COST NO FEE' contract type suggests costs are reimbursed, but the absence of a competitive process means there's no external validation of efficiency or cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a sole-source delivery order, meaning it was not competed. The Department of Defense did not solicit bids from multiple vendors. This approach bypasses the standard competitive process, which typically involves soliciting proposals from various qualified companies. The lack of competition means taxpayers do not benefit from the potential cost savings and innovation that can arise from a bidding war among contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit the government's ability to secure the best possible pricing and may lead to higher overall expenditures for taxpayers. It also reduces transparency in the procurement process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, specifically the Air Force, through enhanced rotary wing aircraft integrity. Services delivered likely include engineering analysis, testing, and potentially maintenance recommendations for rotary wing aircraft. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting Air Force operations and maintenance facilities. Workforce implications may involve specialized engineers and technical staff at Mercer University and potentially subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced innovation.
Sole-source awards can limit opportunities for other qualified firms in the market.
The 'COST NO FEE' contract type requires robust oversight to ensure cost control.

Positive Signals

Mercer University's selection may indicate specialized expertise crucial for this niche requirement.
The long contract duration suggests a stable and ongoing need for these critical services.
The contract supports essential defense readiness for rotary wing aircraft.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services (NAICS 541330) sector, specifically focusing on specialized defense applications related to aircraft integrity. The market for such niche engineering services can be limited, often involving a few key players with specific expertise. While overall engineering services spending is vast, this particular segment is highly specialized, making direct spending benchmarks difficult without more granular data on rotary wing maintenance and engineering support.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not competed and there is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting plans. Therefore, this award does not appear to directly benefit small businesses through set-aside provisions. The absence of subcontracting requirements also means there is no direct mechanism to ensure small business participation in this specific contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. Given the 'COST NO FEE' structure, rigorous financial oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures and ensure costs are reasonable and allocable. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract performance reviews and audits by the Inspector General could provide accountability.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Aircraft Maintenance Contracts
Air Force Engineering and Technical Services
Rotary Wing Aircraft Support Programs
Defense Research and Development Contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Cost Overruns
Limited Transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.8 million to THE CORPORATION OF MERCER UNIVERSITY. ROTARY WING INTEGRITY PROGRAMS TASK ORDER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE CORPORATION OF MERCER UNIVERSITY.

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 $20.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-04-21. End: 2026-04-20.

What is Mercer University's track record with Department of Defense contracts, particularly in engineering services?

Assessing Mercer University's specific track record with the Department of Defense requires a deep dive into federal procurement databases. While universities often engage in research and development contracts, their involvement in direct engineering services for complex military assets like rotary wing aircraft might be less common or highly specialized. A review of past performance evaluations, contract awards, and any reported issues or successes would be necessary to gauge their suitability and reliability for this specific task order. Without this detailed historical data, it's difficult to definitively assess their past performance in this domain.

How does the $20.8 million value of this task order compare to similar rotary wing integrity engineering services?

Direct comparison of this $20.8 million task order to similar rotary wing integrity engineering services is challenging without access to a broader market analysis or a database of comparable contracts. The specialized nature of 'rotary wing integrity programs' suggests a niche market where pricing can vary significantly based on the specific technical requirements, duration, and scope of work. The fact that this was a sole-source award further complicates benchmarking, as there's no competitive data to establish a market rate. Generally, large-scale engineering support for military aviation can run into tens or hundreds of millions, but the precise value-for-money of this specific award remains unverified due to the lack of competitive context.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding a $20.8 million contract without competition?

The primary risks associated with awarding a $20.8 million contract without competition include potential overpayment, reduced innovation, and a lack of transparency. Without competitive bids, the government loses the opportunity to leverage market forces to secure the best possible price and terms. This can lead to inflated costs for taxpayers. Furthermore, a sole-source award may stifle innovation, as there is less incentive for the contractor to develop novel or more efficient solutions when competition is absent. The lack of transparency inherent in non-competitive procurements can also mask inefficiencies or potential conflicts of interest, making robust oversight even more critical.

How effective are 'COST NO FEE' contracts in ensuring value for money in specialized engineering services?

'COST NO FEE' contracts, also known as Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) or Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF) if a fee is involved, aim to reimburse the contractor for allowable costs plus a negotiated fee. While they are useful for research and development or services where costs are uncertain, they shift the financial risk to the government. Ensuring value for money in such contracts heavily relies on stringent oversight, detailed cost accounting, and clear performance metrics. Without effective monitoring, contractors may have less incentive to control costs, potentially leading to expenditures exceeding what might be achieved through a fixed-price or competitively bid contract. The 'NO FEE' aspect here is unusual and suggests the primary motivation is cost reimbursement for essential services rather than profit.

What is the historical spending pattern for rotary wing integrity programs within the Department of Defense?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for 'rotary wing integrity programs' within the Department of Defense requires access to detailed historical contract data, often aggregated by specific program offices or aircraft types. Such programs are critical for maintaining the safety and operational readiness of helicopters and other rotary-wing aircraft, involving aspects like structural integrity, component lifespan, and maintenance protocols. Spending in this area can fluctuate based on fleet age, operational tempo, and technological advancements. Without specific historical data for this task order's scope, it's difficult to provide a precise spending trend, but it's reasonable to assume consistent, significant investment due to the critical nature of aviation safety.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: FA855222R0001

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 135 OSIGIAN BLVD, WARNER ROBINS, GA, 31088

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Private), Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $32,671,753

Exercised Options: $20,811,481

Current Obligation: $20,811,481

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 2

Total Subaward Amount: $1,621,587

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA853020D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline