Air Force awards $9.04M for 7 kit installations, leveraging full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,041,000 ($9.0M)

Contractor: Canadian Commercial Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-08-01

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 425 days

Daily Burn Rate: $21.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: CKI TO #8 CONTRACTOR TO ACCOMPLISH 7 KIT INSTALLATIONS.

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $9.0 million to CANADIAN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION for work described as: CKI TO #8 CONTRACTOR TO ACCOMPLISH 7 KIT INSTALLATIONS. Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the scope of 7 kit installations. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive pricing environment. 3. Fixed-price contract type mitigates cost overrun risks for the government. 4. Contract duration of 425 days aligns with the delivery of 7 kits. 5. The contract falls within the Aircraft Manufacturing sector, indicating specialized needs. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized, suggesting larger prime contractors were targeted.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $9.04 million for 7 kit installations translates to approximately $1.29 million per kit. Benchmarking this against similar defense contracts for specialized equipment installation requires detailed analysis of the specific kits and labor involved. However, the firm fixed-price nature provides cost certainty. Without more granular data on the kits themselves, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the competitive bidding process is a positive indicator.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this method generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. The Air Force's decision to use full and open competition suggests confidence in the market's ability to meet the requirement effectively.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for receiving the best value by encouraging multiple companies to offer their services, driving down prices through rivalry.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force, receiving critical aircraft kit installations. The services delivered include the installation of 7 specialized kits, enhancing aircraft capabilities. The geographic impact is likely concentrated at the Air Force installation where the work is performed. Workforce implications may include skilled technicians and support staff required for the installation process.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the 'kits' makes it difficult to assess the complexity and potential risks associated with their installation.
The absence of small business participation could limit opportunities for smaller, specialized firms in this acquisition.

Positive Signals

The use of a firm fixed-price contract provides cost predictability and limits the government's exposure to cost overruns.
Awarding through full and open competition suggests a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing.
The contract is for a defined period and scope, indicating clear objectives and deliverables.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Aircraft Manufacturing (NAICS 336411) sector, which encompasses establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing aircraft, aircraft engines and engine parts, and other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment. Spending in this sector is critical for maintaining and upgrading military aviation capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for aircraft modifications, upgrades, and the integration of specialized systems within the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

The contract does not indicate any small business set-aside provisions, suggesting that the requirement was not specifically targeted towards small businesses. This implies that the prime contractor is likely a larger entity capable of fulfilling the complex installation requirements. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans, so the impact on the small business ecosystem is currently unknown but potentially limited if small businesses are not engaged as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will be managed by the Department of the Air Force, likely through contracting officers and program managers responsible for ensuring timely and quality delivery. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which penalizes the contractor for cost overruns. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of contract awards, though specific performance details may be less accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Modification and Maintenance Services
Aerospace Defense Contracts
Military Aircraft Parts and Components
Defense Procurement
Air Force Logistics and Sustainment

Risk Flags

Potential for undefined scope regarding 'kits'
Limited visibility into small business participation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $9.0 million to CANADIAN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION. CKI TO #8 CONTRACTOR TO ACCOMPLISH 7 KIT INSTALLATIONS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CANADIAN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION.

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 $9.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-08-01. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the specific nature of the 7 'kits' being installed, and what is their intended function?

The provided data abbreviates the description to 'CKI TO #8 CONTRACTOR TO ACCOMPLISH 7 KIT INSTALLATIONS.' Without further details, the exact nature and function of these 'kits' remain unspecified. They could range from avionics upgrades, structural enhancements, mission system integration, or other specialized equipment. Understanding the kits' purpose is crucial for assessing the technical complexity, potential risks, and the overall value proposition of the contract. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work or related documentation would be necessary to clarify this.

How does the per-kit installation cost of approximately $1.29 million compare to similar installations for the U.S. Air Force?

The calculated per-kit installation cost is approximately $1.29 million ($9.04M / 7 kits). To benchmark this effectively, a comparative analysis with similar contracts for aircraft kit installations within the Department of Defense is required. Factors such as the complexity of the kits, the type of aircraft, labor rates, and the specific installation environment (e.g., depot vs. field) significantly influence costs. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns or a database of comparable installations, it is difficult to definitively state whether this cost is high, low, or reasonable. However, the firm fixed-price nature and full and open competition suggest an effort to control costs.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) established for this contract, and how will performance be measured?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, typical KPIs for installation contracts often include on-time delivery, adherence to technical specifications, quality of workmanship, and successful integration of the kits. Performance measurement would likely involve regular progress reviews, inspections of the completed installations, and final acceptance testing by the Air Force. The firm fixed-price contract structure inherently incentivizes the contractor to meet these performance standards to avoid financial penalties.

What is the track record of the contractor, Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC), in performing similar aircraft kit installations for the Department of Defense?

The Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) is a Canadian federal Crown corporation that helps Canadian companies obtain government contracts in foreign markets. While CCC itself may not directly perform the installations, it facilitates contracts on behalf of Canadian suppliers. Assessing CCC's track record in this specific context would involve examining the performance history of the underlying Canadian supplier(s) awarded the work through CCC. Information on past performance, including successful completions, any disputes, or contract terminations, would be crucial for evaluating reliability and capability in executing these aircraft kit installations.

What is the historical spending trend for aircraft kit installations by the Department of the Air Force over the past five years?

Historical spending trends for aircraft kit installations by the Department of the Air Force are not directly available from the provided data. To ascertain this, one would need to access comprehensive federal procurement databases (e.g., FPDS-NG, SAM.gov) and filter for contracts related to aircraft modifications, upgrades, and kit installations within the relevant NAICS codes (like 336411) and agencies (Department of the Air Force). Analyzing this data over several fiscal years would reveal patterns in spending levels, types of kits procured, and major contractors involved, providing context for the current $9.04 million award.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT › INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 350 ALBERT ST SUITE 700, OTTAWA

Business Categories: Category Business, Foreign Government, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $9,041,000

Exercised Options: $9,041,000

Current Obligation: $9,041,000

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA862520D2016

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline