BIG SAFARI contract awarded to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC for $35.4M by the Department of the Air Force

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,423,166 ($35.4M)

Contractor: Sierra Nevada Company, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-12-16

End Date: 2022-04-29

Contract Duration: 865 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: BIG SAFARI

Place of Performance

Location: ENGLEWOOD, DENVER County, COLORADO, 80112

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $35.4 million to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC for work described as: BIG SAFARI Key points: 1. Value for money assessed through comparison to similar contracts and market rates. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a sole-source award, potentially impacting price discovery. 3. Risk indicators include the sole-source nature and the contract duration. 4. Performance context is derived from the contract award details and duration. 5. Sector positioning within 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' is noted. 6. The contract was awarded as a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $35.4 million over approximately 2.8 years suggests a moderate annual spend. Without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' contracts would be necessary to determine if the pricing is competitive. The firm fixed-price nature provides some cost certainty, but the absence of competition limits the ability to gauge optimal pricing.

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 approach is typically used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities or when it's deemed not to be in the government's best interest to compete. The lack of competition means there was no direct price comparison through a bidding process, which could lead to higher costs than if multiple offers were solicited.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there is a reduced likelihood of achieving the lowest possible price through competitive bidding. This can result in a less efficient use of public funds if the awarded price is not rigorously justified.

Public Impact

The Department of the Air Force is the primary beneficiary, receiving professional, scientific, and technical services. The contract supports the BIG SAFARI program, likely involving complex technological or scientific endeavors. The geographic impact is centered around the agency's operations, primarily within Colorado. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles within Sierra Nevada Company, LLC.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing advantages for the government.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Contract duration of nearly three years without re-competition could mask inefficiencies.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to a known entity (Sierra Nevada Company, LLC) may indicate specialized expertise.
Delivery order structure suggests it's part of a broader, potentially established, program.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls under the 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' category, which is broad and encompasses a wide range of specialized support. This sector is crucial for government agencies requiring expertise beyond standard procurement. Comparable spending in this sector can vary widely depending on the specific services rendered, but it generally represents a significant portion of federal contracting, supporting innovation and operational needs across various departments.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it indicate any specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to a large entity like Sierra Nevada Company, LLC suggests that the primary focus was on specialized capabilities rather than small business participation. This may limit opportunities for small businesses to engage in this specific contract's work.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. As a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle, oversight might be integrated into the parent contract's framework. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, and specific accountability measures would depend on the terms outlined in the contract and any associated performance work statements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

BIG SAFARI Program
Department of the Air Force Professional Services Contracts
Sole Source Technical Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole Source Award
Lack of Competition
Limited Transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $35.4 million to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC. BIG SAFARI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC.

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 $35.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-12-16. End: 2022-04-29.

What is the track record of SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC with the Department of Defense?

Sierra Nevada Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Sierra Nevada Corporation, has a significant history of contracting with the Department of Defense (DoD) across various agencies, including the Air Force, Navy, and Army. Their work often involves advanced aerospace systems, electronic warfare, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, and space systems. They have been awarded numerous contracts, ranging from research and development to production and sustainment. Analyzing their past performance on similar sole-source or competed contracts, particularly those involving complex technical services, would provide context for their capabilities and reliability in executing the BIG SAFARI contract. Past performance reviews and award histories available through federal procurement databases can offer insights into their delivery timeliness, quality of work, and overall customer satisfaction within the DoD.

How does the $35.4M value compare to similar 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' contracts?

Benchmarking the $35.4 million contract value against similar 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' contracts requires access to detailed contract data, including the specific nature of services provided, duration, and performance outcomes. Generally, contracts in this broad category can range from a few hundred thousand dollars for specialized consulting to tens or hundreds of millions for large-scale R&D or technical support programs. Given this contract's duration of approximately 2.8 years, the annual value is around $12.6 million. This figure needs to be compared with contracts of similar scope, complexity, and duration awarded by the Air Force or other DoD components for comparable technical and scientific services. Without more specific service details, it's difficult to definitively state if $35.4M represents a high, low, or average value, but it indicates a substantial investment in specialized support.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for this type of service?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for professional, scientific, and technical services like those under BIG SAFARI include potential overpricing due to the lack of competitive pressure, reduced innovation from a single provider, and a lack of market validation for the chosen solution. Without competition, the government may not achieve the best possible price or the most innovative approach available in the market. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, making it difficult or costly to switch providers in the future. Furthermore, the government's leverage in negotiating terms and conditions may be diminished. To mitigate these risks, the awarding agency must conduct thorough price reasonableness analyses and ensure robust contract management and oversight to hold the sole-source contractor accountable for performance and cost.

What is the expected effectiveness or outcome of the BIG SAFARI program based on this contract?

The effectiveness and outcome of the BIG SAFARI program, supported by this $35.4 million contract, are not explicitly detailed in the provided data. However, the contract's classification under 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' and its award to Sierra Nevada Company, LLC, suggest it likely supports advanced technological development, intelligence gathering, or complex operational capabilities for the Air Force. The effectiveness would be measured against the program's specific objectives, which could include delivering new systems, enhancing existing capabilities, providing critical data analysis, or supporting strategic missions. The success hinges on the contractor's ability to deliver the required technical solutions and services as defined in the contract's statement of work and performance metrics, and the agency's ability to leverage these services effectively.

How has federal spending in 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' evolved, and how does this contract fit?

Federal spending in the 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' (NAICS 541990) category has generally trended upwards over the past decade, reflecting the government's increasing reliance on specialized external expertise to support complex missions, research, and development across various agencies, particularly Defense, Intelligence, and Science. This $35.4 million contract for the BIG SAFARI program fits within this trend, representing a specific investment by the Department of the Air Force in advanced technical services. While this single contract is a small fraction of the overall federal spending in this broad category, it highlights the continued demand for niche scientific and technical support. Understanding the historical spending patterns within this NAICS code, including major contract vehicles and dominant service providers, can offer context for the significance and potential future trajectory of such awards.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Product/Service Code: TRAINING AIDS AND DEVICES

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

Address: 444 SALOMON CIR, SPARKS, NV, 89434

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $35,423,166

Exercised Options: $35,423,166

Current Obligation: $35,423,166

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 2

Total Subaward Amount: $22,914,585

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA862016G3013

IDV Type: BOA

Timeline