Maxar Mission Solutions awarded $10.7M contract for electrical equipment by the Air Force

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,689,723 ($10.7M)

Contractor: Maxar Mission Solutions Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-02-12

End Date: 2026-01-30

Contract Duration: 1,813 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: B-2 SDS SPIRAL 12 BASE AWARD

Place of Performance

Location: YPSILANTI, WASHTENAW County, MICHIGAN, 48197

State: Michigan Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.7 million to MAXAR MISSION SOLUTIONS INC for work described as: B-2 SDS SPIRAL 12 BASE AWARD Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a non-competitive basis, raising questions about price discovery. 2. The contract duration of over 5 years suggests a long-term need for these supplies. 3. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure may incentivize cost overruns. 4. The specific product code (423610) indicates a focus on wholesale distribution of electrical apparatus. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Air Force, indicating a defense-related need. 6. The contract is a definitive contract, suggesting a clear scope of work.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its non-competitive nature and the lack of detailed cost breakdowns. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) pricing structure, while common for complex or uncertain projects, can lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently. Without comparable bids or market analysis, it's difficult to definitively assess if the $10.7 million represents a fair price for the electrical apparatus and equipment supplied.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This typically occurs when only one vendor can provide the required goods or services, or for reasons of urgency or national security. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for price negotiation through a bidding process, potentially leading to a higher price than if multiple vendors had competed.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the best possible price due to the absence of competitive bidding. The government did not benefit from the cost-saving pressures that typically arise in a competitive procurement environment.

Public Impact

The Department of the Air Force benefits from the reliable supply of essential electrical equipment. This contract ensures the operational readiness of Air Force installations and systems. The services delivered are the wholesale distribution of electrical apparatus and wiring supplies. The geographic impact is primarily within Michigan, where the contractor is located, but the ultimate use is Air Force-wide. Workforce implications are likely within Maxar Mission Solutions Inc., supporting their distribution and logistics operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Long contract duration (over 5 years) may not reflect current market price fluctuations.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a specific entity, ensuring a dedicated supplier for critical electrical equipment.
Definitive contract structure implies a clear understanding of the requirements.
The contract is managed by the Department of the Air Force, a major federal agency with established procurement processes.

Sector Analysis

The procurement falls within the wholesale trade sector, specifically for electrical apparatus and equipment. This sector is crucial for supplying a wide range of industries, including defense, construction, and manufacturing. The market for such goods is generally competitive, making the sole-source nature of this award notable. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more specific product details, but the defense sector often procures specialized electrical components that can command premium pricing.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. The award to a single entity, Maxar Mission Solutions Inc., suggests that small businesses are not directly involved in fulfilling this specific contract, though they may be suppliers to Maxar. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal for this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Air Force contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded within the contract terms, particularly the cost-plus-fixed-fee structure which requires detailed financial reporting. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the absence of publicly available detailed justifications. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Procurement
Air Force Supply Chain Management
Electrical Equipment Procurement
Wholesale Trade Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing
Long contract duration
Lack of detailed justification for sole-source

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.7 million to MAXAR MISSION SOLUTIONS INC. B-2 SDS SPIRAL 12 BASE AWARD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MAXAR MISSION SOLUTIONS 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 $10.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-02-12. End: 2026-01-30.

What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data does not include the specific justification for the sole-source award. Typically, sole-source procurements are justified when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services, or when there is a compelling urgency, or for reasons of national security. Without the official justification document, it is impossible to determine the precise rationale. This lack of transparency is a concern, as it prevents a thorough assessment of whether competition was truly not feasible or if it was simply bypassed.

How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types for similar goods?

Cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contracts are generally used when the costs are uncertain but the final price can be reasonably estimated. The contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee representing profit. For standard wholesale electrical equipment, fixed-price contracts (like FFP - Firm-Fixed-Price) are often preferred as they provide greater price certainty for the buyer and incentivize the seller to control costs. CPFF can lead to higher overall costs if the contractor does not manage expenses efficiently, as the government bears the risk of cost overruns. The choice of CPFF here suggests potential complexity or uncertainty in the supply chain or delivery requirements not evident from the basic award data.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract of this duration (over 5 years)?

A contract duration of over five years (1813 days) for the supply of electrical equipment carries several potential risks. Firstly, market prices for electrical components can fluctuate significantly over such a long period due to changes in raw material costs, technological advancements, and global supply chain dynamics. A fixed fee or even a cost-plus structure might not adequately account for these shifts, potentially leading to the government overpaying or the contractor facing unrecoverable losses. Secondly, long-term contracts can reduce flexibility; if the Air Force's needs change or a superior, more cost-effective alternative emerges, modifying or terminating the contract could be complex and costly. Finally, prolonged reliance on a single supplier, especially under a sole-source award, can diminish the incentive for continuous innovation and efficiency improvements by the contractor.

Can the value of this contract be benchmarked against other similar federal procurements?

Benchmarking the value of this $10.7 million contract is difficult without more specific details about the exact types and quantities of electrical apparatus and equipment being procured. The data indicates a broad category (NAICS 423610: Electrical Apparatus and Equipment, Wiring Supplies, and Related Equipment Merchant Wholesalers). Federal procurement databases (like FPDS) might contain records for similar items, but direct comparisons are challenging due to variations in product specifications, quality standards, delivery requirements, and the specific pricing structures used. Furthermore, the sole-source nature of this award means there isn't a competitive baseline to compare against, making it harder to ascertain if the price is optimal.

What is the track record of Maxar Mission Solutions Inc. in fulfilling government contracts?

Information regarding the specific track record of 'MAXAR MISSION SOLUTIONS INC' in fulfilling government contracts is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require searching federal procurement databases (e.g., FPDS, SAM.gov) for past performance records, contract awards, and any reported issues such as contract terminations, disputes, or performance deficiencies. Without this external data, it's impossible to evaluate their reliability, past performance quality, or history of meeting deadlines and specifications for similar government procurements.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Wholesale Trade › Household Appliances and Electrical and Electronic Goods Merchant Wholesalers › Electrical Apparatus and Equipment, Wiring Supplies, and Related Equipment Merchant Wholesalers

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - APLLICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1200 JOE HALL DR, YPSILANTI, MI, 48197

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,523,677

Exercised Options: $10,689,723

Current Obligation: $10,689,723

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 3

Total Subaward Amount: $889,732

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline