DoD's $47.4M contract for Afghan trainer program awarded to Cessna Aircraft Company

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $47,359,761 ($47.4M)

Contractor: Cessna Aircraft Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-01-21

End Date: 2017-05-08

Contract Duration: 473 days

Daily Burn Rate: $100.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW-ON ICS AFGHAN TRAINER PROGRAM

Place of Performance

Location: WICHITA, SEDGWICK County, KANSAS, 67215

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $47.4 million to CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW-ON ICS AFGHAN TRAINER PROGRAM Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price competition. 2. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests cost certainty for the government. 3. Contract duration of approximately 1.5 years. 4. The contract falls under 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' PSC. 5. Awarded by the Department of Defense, indicating a focus on national security. 6. The contractor, Cessna Aircraft Company, is a known entity in the aerospace industry.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $47.4 million for approximately 1.5 years of support for the Afghan trainer program appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized aviation support services. However, without specific benchmarks for similar Afghan trainer programs or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost predictability, but the lack of competition may have led to a higher price than could have been achieved through a competitive bidding process. Further analysis would require comparing the scope of services and pricing to other DoD aviation support contracts.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning that only one contractor, Cessna Aircraft Company, was solicited. This approach bypasses the standard competitive bidding process, which typically involves multiple vendors submitting proposals. While sole-source awards can be justified for unique capabilities or urgent needs, they generally result in less price discovery and potentially higher costs for the government compared to full and open competition. The absence of competing bids means there is no direct market comparison to assess if the negotiated price represents the best value.

Taxpayer Impact: The sole-source nature of this award means taxpayers did not benefit from the cost savings that often arise from competitive bidding. The government may have paid a premium due to the lack of alternative offers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Afghan aviation personnel who will receive training, enhancing their operational capabilities. The contract supports the delivery of essential training services crucial for the sustainability of Afghan air assets. Geographic impact is focused on Afghanistan, where the training will be conducted. Workforce implications include the deployment of trainers and support personnel, potentially both U.S. and local Afghan staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially increasing costs.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
Potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly due to lack of competition.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost certainty.
Contractor has established expertise in aircraft manufacturing and support.
Award supports a critical mission in a challenging operational environment.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high technological complexity and significant government procurement. Contracts for specialized training and support services, particularly in international contexts, are common. This contract fits within the broader category of aviation support and training, a segment that requires specialized knowledge and often involves long-term relationships due to the nature of the equipment and training involved. Benchmarking this spending would require comparing it to other aviation training programs, especially those conducted by the DoD in similar theaters.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides or subcontracting opportunities. The award to a large, established aerospace company like Cessna Aircraft Company suggests that the primary focus was on specialized capabilities rather than promoting small business participation. Further investigation would be needed to determine if any subcontracting plans were in place to involve smaller firms.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management structures. Given it's a sole-source award, the justification and negotiation process would be subject to internal DoD review and potentially oversight by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) if protested. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract performance would be monitored by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).

Related Government Programs

Afghan National Army Air Corps Training
DoD Aviation Support Contracts
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) Programs
Foreign Military Sales Training Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for cost overruns
Limited transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $47.4 million to CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY. IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW-ON ICS AFGHAN TRAINER PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $47.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-01-21. End: 2017-05-08.

What specific training services were provided under this contract, and how were they tailored to the needs of the Afghan trainer program?

The contract, IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW-ON ICS AFGHAN TRAINER PROGRAM, awarded to Cessna Aircraft Company for $47.4 million, likely encompassed a range of aviation training services essential for the operation and maintenance of aircraft within the Afghan context. This could include pilot training, maintenance crew training, and potentially specialized mission training. The tailoring of these services would have been based on the specific aircraft types operated by Afghan forces and the operational requirements outlined by the Department of Defense and its partners in Afghanistan. Given the 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' classification, the focus was on ensuring the Afghan air wing could effectively utilize and sustain its aviation assets, contributing to their self-sufficiency and operational readiness. The firm fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope of training objectives and deliverables.

How does the $47.4 million contract value compare to similar aviation training programs managed by the DoD in other regions or time periods?

Comparing the $47.4 million contract value requires access to detailed data on similar DoD aviation training programs, which is not readily available in the public domain. However, contracts of this magnitude for specialized training and support in complex operational environments are not uncommon for the Department of Defense. Factors influencing the cost include the duration of the contract (approximately 1.5 years), the number of personnel to be trained, the complexity of the aircraft and systems involved, and the logistical challenges of operating in Afghanistan. Without specific comparable contract data, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a high or low cost. However, the sole-source nature suggests that competitive pressures were absent, which could imply a higher price than a competitively awarded contract might have yielded.

What were the primary justifications for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to Cessna Aircraft Company?

Sole-source contract awards are typically justified when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services. For Cessna Aircraft Company, potential justifications could include possessing unique technical expertise, proprietary technology, or existing infrastructure directly related to the specific aircraft or training systems used by the Afghan Air Force. It's also possible that the contract was a follow-on to previous work where Cessna was the incumbent provider, and transitioning to a new vendor would have been prohibitively costly or disruptive. The Department of Defense would have had to document these justifications thoroughly, often citing reasons such as urgency, lack of competition, or the need for compatibility with existing systems, to satisfy regulatory requirements for sole-source procurement.

What is Cessna Aircraft Company's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in providing training or support services?

Cessna Aircraft Company, now part of Textron Aviation, has a long-standing history as a manufacturer of various aircraft, including those utilized by military and government entities. Their track record with the Department of Defense likely includes numerous contracts for aircraft procurement, modification, and sustainment. While specific details on their performance in providing training services under contracts like this one require deeper investigation into contract databases and performance reports, their established presence in the defense sector suggests a level of experience and capability. The fact that they were awarded this follow-on program indicates a degree of satisfaction with their previous performance or a recognized necessity for their continued involvement in supporting Afghan aviation capabilities.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this nature, and what mitigation strategies might have been employed?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source contract is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive pressure. This can lead to reduced value for taxpayer money. Other risks include a potential decline in service quality if the contractor faces no competitive threat, and a lack of innovation. Mitigation strategies employed by the DoD could include rigorous negotiation of the contract terms and price, establishing clear performance metrics and incentives, conducting thorough market research to ensure no other viable sources exist, and implementing robust oversight and quality assurance processes. For this specific contract, the firm fixed-price structure itself acts as a risk mitigation tool by capping the government's financial exposure, provided the scope is well-defined.

How has spending on Afghan aviation training programs evolved over time, and does this contract represent a continuation or a shift in strategy?

Spending on Afghan aviation training programs has been a significant component of U.S. efforts to build the capacity of Afghan security forces. This contract, identified as an 'IGF FOLLOW-ON ICS AFGHAN TRAINER PROGRAM,' strongly suggests it is a continuation of prior efforts rather than a new strategic direction. Such follow-on contracts are typical in long-term capacity-building missions where initial training and support lay the groundwork for sustained operations. The evolution of spending in this area would likely reflect changes in U.S. policy, the operational status of Afghan aviation units, and the specific types of aircraft being supported. This particular award indicates an ongoing commitment to maintaining and enhancing Afghan air power capabilities through dedicated training and support services.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Support Activities for Air Transportation › Other Support Activities for Air Transportation

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Textron Inc (UEI: 001338979)

Address: ONE CESSNA BLVD, WICHITA, KS, 67215

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $80,378,090

Exercised Options: $47,359,761

Current Obligation: $47,359,761

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline