DoD Awards $13.8M for Missile and Space Systems Development to Charles Stark Draper Laboratory

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,856,402 ($13.9M)

Contractor: THE Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-12-02

End Date: 2003-09-30

Contract Duration: 302 days

Daily Burn Rate: $45.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200303!00A040!1700!XSP01 !STRATEGIC SYSTEMS PROGRAMS !N0003003C0002 !A!N! !N!P00001 !20021202!20030930!066587478!066587478!066587478!N!CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATOR!555 TECHNOLOGY SQUARE !CAMBRIDGE !MA!02139!11000!017!25!CAMBRIDGE !MIDDLESEX !MASS !+000013879967!N!N!000000000000!AC27!RDTE/MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS-OP SYSTEM DEVELOP !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !2CNJ!UGM-96 TRIDENT !334511!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !D!N!U!1!001!N!1A!Z!Y!Z! ! !N!Z!N! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: CAMBRIDGE, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02139

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.9 million to THE CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY, INC. for work described as: 200303!00A040!1700!XSP01 !STRATEGIC SYSTEMS PROGRAMS !N0003003C0002 !A!N! !N!P00001 !20021202!20030930!066587478!066587478!066587478!N!CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATOR!555 TECHNOLOGY SQUARE !CAMBRIDGE !MA!02139!11000!017!25!CAMBRIDGE !MIDDL… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for research, development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) of missile and space systems. 2. The sole contractor, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc., has a long history with the Department of Defense. 3. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 4. This spending falls within the Defense sector, specifically R&D for missile and space systems.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $13.8M for a 302-day period appears reasonable for specialized R&D. However, without specific benchmarks for similar missile and space system development contracts, a definitive value assessment is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was awarded sole-source to Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. This limits price discovery and competition, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple vendors were considered.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds are used for this sole-source contract, highlighting the importance of ensuring fair pricing and effective execution to maximize value.

Public Impact

Supports advanced defense capabilities in missile and space systems. Funds specialized research and development critical for national security. The sole-source nature raises questions about cost-effectiveness and potential for competitive pricing.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competition.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can incentivize higher costs.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in provided data.

Positive Signals

Supports critical defense R&D.
Contract awarded to a known, specialized entity.

Sector Analysis

This contract is within the Defense sector, specifically focusing on Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) for missile and space systems. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining technological superiority but can be costly due to the specialized nature of the work.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication in the provided data that small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. The award was made directly to a large, established research laboratory.

Oversight & Accountability

The Department of Defense, through the Defense Contract Management Agency, is responsible for overseeing this contract. The effectiveness of oversight in ensuring cost control and performance for sole-source, cost-plus contracts is crucial.

Related Government Programs

Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing
Department of Defense Contracting
Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
Potential for cost overruns
Lack of competitive pricing pressure
Limited transparency on performance metrics

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.9 million to THE CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY, INC.. 200303!00A040!1700!XSP01 !STRATEGIC SYSTEMS PROGRAMS !N0003003C0002 !A!N! !N!P00001 !20021202!20030930!066587478!066587478!066587478!N!CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATOR!555 TECHNOLOGY SQUARE !CAMBRIDGE !MA!02139!11000!017!25!CAMBRIDGE !MIDDLESEX !MASS !+000013879967!N!N!000000000000!AC27!RDTE/MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS-OP SYSTEM DEVELOP !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !2CNJ!UGM-96 TRIDENT !334511!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY, 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 $13.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-12-02. End: 2003-09-30.

What is the historical performance and cost-effectiveness of Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. on similar sole-source RDT&E contracts?

Assessing the historical performance and cost-effectiveness of Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. on similar sole-source RDT&E contracts is vital. Reviewing past contract awards, final costs versus initial estimates, and independent performance reviews can provide insights into their efficiency and value proposition. This historical data would help justify the sole-source decision and inform future pricing negotiations.

What are the specific deliverables and performance metrics for this contract to ensure accountability?

The specific deliverables and performance metrics for this contract are essential for ensuring accountability and measuring success. Without clearly defined milestones, technical objectives, and quality standards, it is difficult to assess whether the $13.8 million investment is yielding the intended technological advancements. Robust oversight should focus on tracking progress against these metrics.

Are there any alternative technologies or contractors that could fulfill the requirements at a lower cost or with greater efficiency?

Given the sole-source nature of this award, a thorough market analysis should have been conducted to determine if alternative technologies or contractors could fulfill the requirements at a lower cost or with greater efficiency. Even for specialized R&D, exploring potential competition or alternative approaches is key to ensuring the government obtains the best value for taxpayer dollars.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D 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

Address: 555 TECHNOLOGY SQ, CAMBRIDGE, MA, 90

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

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline