Northrop Grumman receives $121.9M for Army National Guard training support, awarded via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $121,906,455 ($121.9M)

Contractor: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2011-12-31

End Date: 2015-06-29

Contract Duration: 1,276 days

Daily Burn Rate: $95.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SUPPORT TO ARMY NATIONAL GUARD MISSION COMMAND TRAINING SUPPORT PROGRAM (MCTSP)

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22204

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $121.9 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION for work described as: SUPPORT TO ARMY NATIONAL GUARD MISSION COMMAND TRAINING SUPPORT PROGRAM (MCTSP) Key points: 1. Contract value of $121.9M over approximately 3.5 years indicates significant investment in training infrastructure. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract type (Time and Materials) can pose cost control risks if not managed diligently. 4. Performance period spans from late 2011 to mid-2015, providing a historical context for the services rendered. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 611310 points to services related to colleges, universities, and professional schools. 6. The contractor, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, is a major defense and aerospace company, suggesting established capabilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $121.9 million for a period of roughly 3.5 years averages to approximately $34.8 million per year. Without specific benchmarks for Army National Guard Mission Command Training Support Program (MCTSP) services, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money. However, the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type can lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not closely monitored for labor hours and material usage. The number of bids received (4) is a moderate indicator of competition, but the final pricing would be the key determinant of value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a 'full and open competition' solicitation, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. Four bids were received, which suggests a reasonable level of competition. The open nature of the competition is generally favorable for price discovery, as multiple companies vie for the contract, potentially driving down costs. However, the effectiveness of this competition in achieving the best possible price depends on the specific requirements and the number of qualified bidders.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and ensures that the government explores a wide range of potential solutions. This process helps prevent overpayment and promotes efficiency by encouraging contractors to offer their best value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Army National Guard units receiving mission command training support. Services delivered likely include curriculum development, training delivery, simulation support, and potentially technical assistance for command and control systems. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, supporting National Guard units across various states and territories. Workforce implications may involve specialized instructors, training developers, and technical support personnel, potentially including both government and contractor staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The defense training and simulation sector is a significant market within the broader aerospace and defense industry. Companies like Northrop Grumman compete for contracts that provide essential support services, including advanced training solutions, to military branches. Spending in this area is driven by the need for realistic and effective training to maintain combat readiness in complex operational environments. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within other large-scale training support contracts awarded to major defense contractors for similar military branches.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication from the provided data that this contract included specific small business set-asides. As a large prime contract awarded to a major corporation, the primary focus is likely on the prime contractor's capabilities. However, large prime contractors are often required to meet subcontracting goals with small businesses. The extent to which Northrop Grumman utilized small businesses as subcontractors for this MCTSP contract would determine the direct impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting agency (Department of the Interior, in this case, likely acting on behalf of the Army) and the relevant program executive office or contracting command. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, delivery schedules, and payment clauses. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arose during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, army-national-guard, training-support, mission-command, northrop-grumman, time-and-materials, full-and-open-competition, department-of-the-interior, colleges-universities-professional-schools, virginia, large-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $121.9 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION. SUPPORT TO ARMY NATIONAL GUARD MISSION COMMAND TRAINING SUPPORT PROGRAM (MCTSP)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (Departmental Offices).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $121.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-12-31. End: 2015-06-29.

What is the track record of Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation in delivering similar mission command training support services to military branches?

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation is a major defense contractor with extensive experience in providing a wide array of services to the U.S. military, including training, simulation, and command and control systems. While specific details on their performance for the Army National Guard Mission Command Training Support Program (MCTSP) are not provided in this data snippet, their history includes large-scale contracts for advanced technology solutions, system integration, and operational support across various defense platforms. Their established presence in the defense sector suggests a capacity to handle complex training requirements. However, a deeper dive into past performance reviews, contract modifications, and any disputes or awards related to similar contracts would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment of their track record on this specific type of service.

How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar training support contracts for other military branches or National Guard programs?

The annual average cost for this contract is approximately $34.8 million ($121.9M / 3.5 years). Benchmarking this against similar training support contracts requires access to data on comparable programs. Contracts for advanced simulation, virtual training environments, and complex system support for other branches like the Air Force or Navy, or even other National Guard initiatives, could serve as comparisons. Factors influencing cost include the scope of services (e.g., curriculum development, live-fire support, virtual reality), the technology involved, the duration of the contract, and the level of competition. Without specific data points for comparable contracts, it's difficult to definitively state whether $34.8 million annually represents a high, low, or average cost. However, given the scale and complexity often associated with military training modernization, this figure falls within a plausible range for significant support programs.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type used for this award, and how were they mitigated?

The primary risk with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract is the potential for cost overruns, as the contractor is reimbursed for direct labor hours at specified rates and for the actual cost of materials. This structure can incentivize longer labor times or higher material costs if not rigorously managed. Mitigation strategies typically involve strong government oversight, including detailed monitoring of labor hours, verification of material costs, and the establishment of not-to-exceed (NTE) limits or cost ceilings within the contract. The government contracting officer and technical representatives play a crucial role in scrutinizing invoices and ensuring that all charges are reasonable, allocable, and necessary for contract performance. The number of bids (4) suggests some level of market confidence, but the effectiveness of T&M hinges on diligent administration.

What was the specific nature of the 'Mission Command Training Support Program (MCTSP)' and its importance to the Army National Guard?

The Mission Command Training Support Program (MCTSP) is designed to enhance the operational effectiveness of Army National Guard units by providing comprehensive training solutions focused on command and control (C2) systems and doctrine. Mission Command emphasizes the commander's intent and decentralized execution, requiring sophisticated understanding and application of communication, planning, and decision-making processes. Support likely includes training on relevant software, hardware, communication networks, and tactical procedures necessary for units to operate effectively in complex environments. The importance of MCTSP lies in ensuring that National Guard units are proficient in modern warfare tactics and technologies, enabling them to fulfill their state and federal missions, including domestic response and overseas deployments, with a high degree of readiness and interoperability.

How has federal spending on defense training and simulation services evolved over the period this contract was active (2011-2015) and subsequently?

Federal spending on defense training and simulation services generally remained robust throughout the 2011-2015 period, reflecting ongoing military operations and the need for advanced training technologies. This era saw continued investment in virtual and constructive simulations, as well as sophisticated live training support. Following this period, spending patterns have continued to evolve, influenced by shifting geopolitical landscapes, technological advancements (like AI and advanced VR/AR), and budget priorities. While specific figures for the entire defense training sector are vast, the trend has been towards more technologically integrated and cost-effective training solutions. Post-2015, there has been an increasing emphasis on networked training environments, cyber warfare training, and adaptive learning systems, often leveraging commercial off-the-shelf technologies where possible to manage costs.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational ServicesColleges, Universities, and Professional SchoolsColleges, Universities, and Professional Schools

Product/Service Code: INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENTINSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Corporation (UEI: 967356127)

Address: 12900 FEDERAL SYSTEMS PARK DR, FAIRFAX, VA, 22033

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $121,906,455

Exercised Options: $121,906,455

Current Obligation: $121,906,455

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS02F0071S

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline

Start Date: 2011-12-31

Current End Date: 2015-06-29

Potential End Date: 2015-06-29 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-11-29

More Contracts from Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

View all Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation federal contracts →

Other Department of the Interior Contracts

View all Department of the Interior contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending