DoD's $28.6M Big Safari contract awarded to General Atomics for support services shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,655,513 ($28.7M)

Contractor: General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-04-19

End Date: 2020-08-31

Contract Duration: 500 days

Daily Burn Rate: $57.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: BIG SAFARI

Place of Performance

Location: POWAY, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92064

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $28.7 million to GENERAL ATOMICS AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS, INC. for work described as: BIG SAFARI Key points: 1. The contract's value, while substantial, requires further scrutiny against comparable support services to ensure optimal taxpayer return. 2. Limited competition dynamics for this contract may have influenced pricing and potentially reduced opportunities for cost savings. 3. The 'NOT COMPETED' award type raises a flag for potential missed opportunities in leveraging market competition. 4. Performance context is limited, necessitating a review of deliverables and outcomes against the contract's objectives. 5. This contract falls within the broader 'Support Services' sector, where efficiency and cost-effectiveness are key performance indicators. 6. The absence of small business set-asides warrants an examination of subcontracting opportunities for smaller enterprises.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this $28.6 million contract against similar support services contracts within the Department of Defense is crucial. Without specific performance metrics or a detailed breakdown of services rendered, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract type, while offering flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed tightly. Comparing the per-unit cost or the overall cost relative to the scope of work against industry standards would provide a clearer picture of its economic efficiency.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a 'NOT COMPETED' procedure, indicating that a full and open competition was not conducted. This typically occurs when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement, or in specific emergency situations. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no direct price comparison or negotiation against competing offers, which could potentially lead to a higher price than if the contract had been competed. The implications for price discovery are significant, as the government did not benefit from the competitive tension that drives down costs.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without a competitive process, there's less assurance that the price reflects the best possible value achievable in the market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely entities within the Department of Defense requiring specialized support services. The contract delivers essential support services, though the specific nature of these services is not detailed in the provided data. The geographic impact is centered around the contract's performance location, which is indicated as California. Workforce implications could include the direct employment of personnel by General Atomics and potential indirect employment through subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in suboptimal pricing.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure requires diligent oversight to control costs.
Specific performance metrics and outcomes are not readily available for assessment.
The 'NOT COMPETED' award raises questions about the justification for not seeking broader market input.

Positive Signals

Award to an established contractor, General Atomics, may indicate reliability in service delivery.
The contract duration suggests a sustained need for the services provided.
The contract falls under the 'BIG SAFARI' program, which often involves complex and critical national security requirements.

Sector Analysis

This contract operates within the broader aerospace and defense support services sector. This sector is characterized by high technological complexity, stringent regulatory requirements, and significant government spending. Contracts like this often involve specialized technical expertise, maintenance, logistics, and program management. The 'BIG SAFARI' program itself is known for acquiring and supporting advanced technologies for the Air Force, indicating a focus on cutting-edge capabilities. Benchmarking against similar support contracts within this specialized niche is essential for evaluating value.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the primary award was made to a large business. It is important to assess whether General Atomics has subcontracting plans that include small businesses to ensure broader economic participation. Without specific subcontracting data, it's difficult to determine the impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting agency, the Department of the Air Force, and potentially the Department of Defense's Inspector General. Given the 'NOT COMPETED' nature and the CPFF structure, robust oversight is critical to ensure that costs are reasonable and that the services delivered meet the contract's objectives. Transparency would be enhanced by public reporting of performance metrics and cost breakdowns.

Related Government Programs

BIG SAFARI Program
Air Force Support Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Aerospace and Defense Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus contract type
Lack of detailed performance data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $28.7 million to GENERAL ATOMICS AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS, INC.. BIG SAFARI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL ATOMICS AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS, 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 $28.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-04-19. End: 2020-08-31.

What is the specific nature of the 'All Other Support Services' provided under this contract?

The provided data classifies the service under NAICS code 561990, 'All Other Support Services.' This is a broad category that can encompass a wide range of activities not specified elsewhere. For the 'BIG SAFARI' program, these services likely relate to specialized technical support, program management, logistics, or operational assistance for advanced aerospace and intelligence systems. Without more detailed contract documentation, the precise nature of these services remains unspecified, making it difficult to assess their necessity and effectiveness beyond their general classification.

How does the $28.6 million total award compare to similar 'BIG SAFARI' contracts or other Air Force support services contracts?

Comparing this $28.6 million contract requires access to a database of similar 'BIG SAFARI' or Air Force support services contracts. The 'BIG SAFARI' program often involves unique, high-value, and specialized acquisitions, making direct comparisons challenging. However, generally, $28.6 million is a significant sum for support services. A thorough benchmark analysis would involve looking at contracts with similar scopes of work, durations, and contractor capabilities. If comparable contracts for similar services were awarded through full and open competition at a lower cost, it would indicate potential overpricing or inefficiency in this specific award. Conversely, if similar specialized services commanded higher prices, this contract might represent reasonable value within its niche.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and deliverables associated with this contract, and how was performance measured?

The provided data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or detailed deliverables for this contract. For a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, performance is typically measured against the achievement of defined objectives and the efficient use of resources to meet those objectives. The 'fixed fee' component implies that the contractor is incentivized to complete the work within the estimated cost structure to maximize their profit. However, without knowing the specific tasks, milestones, and quality standards outlined in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), it is impossible to assess how General Atomics' performance was measured or whether it met the government's expectations.

What is General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense, particularly on 'BIG SAFARI' or similar complex programs?

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) has a well-established track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in the development and production of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and related technologies. They are a major contractor for programs like the Predator and Reaper drones. Their involvement in the 'BIG SAFARI' program, which focuses on acquiring and supporting advanced airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, aligns with their core expertise. While GA-ASI is generally considered a capable and experienced contractor in its domain, the specific performance on this particular support services contract would require a review of its delivery history, adherence to schedule and budget, and overall quality of service provided under this specific award.

Given the 'NOT COMPETED' status, what was the justification for not seeking bids from other potential contractors?

The justification for a 'NOT COMPETED' award typically falls under specific exceptions to full and open competition outlined in federal acquisition regulations (e.g., FAR Part 6). Common reasons include: (1) only one responsible source exists to meet the agency's needs (e.g., unique capabilities, proprietary technology); (2) an urgent and compelling need where delays associated with competition would cause significant damage; or (3) specific circumstances where it is not in the government's interest to compete. For the 'BIG SAFARI' program, it's plausible that the required support services were highly specialized and only General Atomics possessed the necessary expertise, technology, or existing infrastructure to fulfill the requirement without unacceptable delay or cost. A formal Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) document would detail the specific rationale.

What is the historical spending pattern for 'BIG SAFARI' or similar support services contracts awarded by the Department of the Air Force?

Historical spending on the 'BIG SAFARI' program and related support services by the Department of the Air Force is substantial and reflects the ongoing investment in advanced airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. The 'BIG SAFARI' program itself has seen significant funding over the years to acquire and sustain cutting-edge technologies. Support services contracts are a critical component, often representing a considerable portion of the total program cost, covering maintenance, upgrades, training, and operational support. Analyzing historical spending trends would reveal whether the $28.6 million awarded here is consistent with previous investments for similar scope and complexity, or if it represents an outlier, potentially indicating increased costs or scope creep over time.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Other Support Services › All Other Support Services

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

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

Parent Company: General Atomics

Address: 14200 KIRKHAM WAY, POWAY, CA, 92064

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $32,737,195

Exercised Options: $32,737,195

Current Obligation: $28,655,513

Actual Outlays: $1,969,180

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 4

Total Subaward Amount: $145,872

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA862016G3021

IDV Type: BOA

Timeline