DoD's $821M Bell Textron contract for aircraft sustainment, awarded in 1999, runs through 2030

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $821,041,004 ($821.0M)

Contractor: Bell Textron Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1999-10-04

End Date: 2030-11-04

Contract Duration: 11,354 days

Daily Burn Rate: $72.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WORTH, TARRANT County, TEXAS, 76101

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $821.0 million to BELL TEXTRON INC for work described as: Key points: 1. Long-term contract raises questions about sustained value and potential for cost overruns. 2. Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially impacting price efficiency. 3. Significant duration and cost suggest a critical, long-standing need for these services. 4. Performance context is limited without specific delivery metrics or historical performance data. 5. Contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically supporting aviation platforms.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's substantial value and long duration, spanning over three decades, warrant close scrutiny for value for money. Without comparable contracts or detailed cost breakdowns, it's difficult to benchmark the pricing effectively. The cost-plus award fee structure can incentivize cost increases, making it crucial to assess if the award fees are tied to demonstrable performance improvements that justify the overall expenditure. The lack of competition further complicates value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning there was no open competition. This approach is typically justified when only one responsible source can provide the required goods or services. However, it significantly limits the opportunity for price discovery and can lead to higher costs compared to a competed contract. The absence of multiple bidders means the government did not benefit from competitive pressures to drive down prices.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the lack of competition. Without a competitive bidding process, there is less assurance that the pricing reflects the best possible value or that costs have been minimized.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its aviation units, ensuring operational readiness of critical aircraft. Services delivered likely include maintenance, repair, overhaul, and logistical support for Bell Textron aircraft. Geographic impact is likely widespread, supporting military operations across various bases and deployment locations. Workforce implications include sustained employment for skilled technicians and support staff at Bell Textron and its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long-term sole-source nature may reduce incentives for cost efficiency.
Cost-plus award fee structure could lead to cost escalation if not tightly managed.
Lack of competition limits transparency in pricing and service delivery benchmarks.
Extended contract duration increases the risk of obsolescence or changing technological needs.

Positive Signals

Sustained support for critical defense assets ensures operational readiness.
Long-term relationship may foster deep technical expertise and efficiency over time.
Award fee structure, if well-defined, can incentivize performance improvements.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense Industrial Base sector, specifically focusing on aircraft manufacturing and sustainment. The market for military aircraft support is often characterized by long-term relationships between prime contractors and the government due to the specialized nature of the platforms and high barriers to entry. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other long-term sustainment contracts for major defense platforms, which often run into hundreds of millions or billions of dollars over their lifecycles.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans for this specific contract is not provided in the data. Given the sole-source nature and the prime contractor, it's possible that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses exist, but their extent and oversight would need further investigation. The absence of explicit set-aside information suggests it may not have been a primary focus for this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. Accountability measures would be embedded within the contract's terms, including reporting requirements and the performance-based award fee structure. Transparency is a concern due to the sole-source nature; however, contract modifications and performance reviews should be subject to internal DoD oversight and potentially Inspector General reviews.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance and Repair Services
Defense Aviation Support Contracts
Long-Term Government Service Contracts
Cost-Plus Award Fee Contracts
Sole-Source Defense Procurements

Risk Flags

Long contract duration
Sole-source award
Cost-plus contract type
Lack of detailed performance metrics
Potential for cost overruns

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $821.0 million to BELL TEXTRON INC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BELL TEXTRON INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $821.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-10-04. End: 2030-11-04.

What is the historical spending trend for this specific contract since its inception in 1999?

Detailed historical spending data for this specific contract from 1999 to the present is not available in the provided data. However, the contract's total award value is $821,041,003.87, with an estimated completion date in November 2030. This suggests a significant and consistent expenditure over its long duration. To understand the spending trend, one would need access to annual expenditure reports, contract modification histories, and potentially program budget justifications from the Department of Defense to analyze how funds have been allocated and utilized year over year.

How does the per-unit cost of services under this contract compare to similar sustainment contracts for other military aircraft platforms?

A direct per-unit cost comparison is challenging without specific details on the services rendered (e.g., hours of maintenance, specific parts replaced, types of aircraft supported) and the corresponding costs. The provided data indicates a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type, which means costs are reimbursed plus a fee that is based on performance. Benchmarking would require access to similar CPAF contracts for comparable aircraft sustainment programs, including their total contract values, durations, and performance metrics. Without this granular data, assessing whether the per-unit cost is competitive or indicative of good value for money is not feasible.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the 'award fee' component of this contract?

The specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for this Bell Textron contract are not detailed in the provided summary data. Typically, for aircraft sustainment contracts, award fees are tied to metrics such as aircraft availability rates, mission capable rates, turnaround times for repairs, quality of maintenance performed, adherence to schedules, and cost control measures. The effectiveness of the award fee structure in driving desired performance and ensuring value for money depends heavily on how well these KPIs are defined, measured, and linked to the fee amount.

What is the rationale behind the sole-source award, and were any attempts made to explore competitive options?

The rationale for this contract being awarded as 'NOT COMPETED' (sole-source) is not explicitly stated in the provided data. Generally, sole-source awards are justified under specific circumstances outlined in federal acquisition regulations, such as when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services, or in cases of urgent and compelling need. Without further documentation, it's unknown if alternative sources were considered or if the justification for sole-sourcing was robust. This lack of competition raises concerns about potential price inflation and reduced innovation.

What is the track record of Bell Textron Inc. in fulfilling similar long-term sustainment contracts for the Department of Defense?

Bell Textron Inc. has a long history of providing aircraft and support services to the Department of Defense. While specific performance details for this particular $821M contract are not provided, the company is a major defense contractor known for its involvement in various helicopter and tiltrotor aircraft programs. Their track record in fulfilling similar long-term sustainment contracts would generally be assessed based on factors like on-time delivery, quality of service, cost performance, and responsiveness to DoD requirements across their portfolio of contracts. A comprehensive review would involve examining past performance evaluations and any contract disputes or awards.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract of this duration (1999-2030) and value, particularly concerning technological obsolescence or changing military requirements?

A contract spanning over three decades carries significant risks. Technological obsolescence is a major concern; aircraft and support systems designed in the late 20th century may become outdated, requiring costly upgrades or replacements. Changing military requirements could also render the specific services or platforms less relevant, leading to inefficiencies. Furthermore, the long duration increases the likelihood of economic fluctuations, changes in contractor viability, and potential for scope creep or contract disputes over time. Effective contract management, including regular reviews and potential renegotiations, is crucial to mitigate these risks.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Textron Inc (UEI: 001338979)

Address: 3255 BELL HELICOPTER BLVD, FORT WORTH, TX, 76118

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline