DOD's $47M TRIDENT GUIDANCE contract awarded to Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. without competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $47,004,724 ($47.0M)

Contractor: THE Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-10-15

End Date: 2012-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,173 days

Daily Burn Rate: $40.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: TRIDENT GUIDANCE

Place of Performance

Location: CAMBRIDGE, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02139

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $47.0 million to THE CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY, INC. for work described as: TRIDENT GUIDANCE Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs. 2. The contract's duration of over three years suggests a significant, ongoing need for these specialized parts. 3. Lack of competition raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible value. 4. The firm fixed-price contract type shifts some risk to the contractor, but the absence of competition is a primary risk. 5. This contract falls under the 'Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts' manufacturing sector. 6. The award was made by the Department of the Navy, indicating a specific defense application.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Without competitive bidding, it is difficult to benchmark the value for money on this $47 million contract. The firm fixed-price structure is positive, but the lack of competition means there's no market validation of the pricing. Comparisons to similar sole-source contracts for specialized defense components would be necessary to assess if the pricing is reasonable, but such data is often proprietary or difficult to access.

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. This typically occurs when only one responsible source can provide the required goods or services. The lack of competition means there were no other bidders, and therefore no direct price comparison or negotiation leverage from a competitive market.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers do not benefit from the cost savings typically achieved through competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher overall expenditure for the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its naval operations, which rely on the TRIDENT GUIDANCE system. The contract delivers essential parts and auxiliary equipment for guided missiles and space vehicles. The geographic impact is primarily within the defense supply chain, with potential for ripple effects in the aerospace and defense manufacturing sector. Workforce implications include specialized manufacturing and engineering roles at the contractor's facility.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated prices and reduced value for taxpayer dollars.
Sole-source awards can create dependency on a single contractor, limiting future flexibility.
The specialized nature of the components means oversight requires deep technical expertise.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type helps control costs once the price is set.
The contractor, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc., is a known entity in defense research and development.
The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term need, allowing for predictable production planning.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the 'Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' industry. This is a highly specialized niche within the broader aerospace and defense sector, characterized by high barriers to entry due to technical expertise, intellectual property, and stringent quality requirements. Spending in this sector is heavily influenced by defense budgets and geopolitical factors. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the proprietary nature of many defense components and the limited number of qualified manufacturers.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. The sole-source nature of the award further limits opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to the delivery of specified parts according to the firm fixed-price agreement. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the classified or sensitive aspects often associated with defense procurement. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

TRIDENT II (D5) Missile Program
Ballistic Missile Defense Systems
Naval Weapons Systems
Aerospace Manufacturing
Defense Supply Chain Management

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing validation.
Potential for contractor dependency and reduced market leverage.
Limited transparency inherent in non-competed defense contracts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $47.0 million to THE CHARLES STARK DRAPER LABORATORY, INC.. TRIDENT GUIDANCE

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 (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $47.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-10-15. End: 2012-12-31.

What is the specific nature of the 'TRIDENT GUIDANCE' components being procured?

The data indicates the contract is for 'Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' under the NAICS code 336419, specifically related to the TRIDENT GUIDANCE system. While the exact components are not detailed in the provided data, they are critical auxiliary parts and equipment necessary for the functioning of guided missiles and space vehicles within the TRIDENT program. This could encompass a range of items from electronic sub-assemblies, gyroscopic components, structural elements, or specialized sensors, all vital for the guidance and operational integrity of the missile system.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of being competed?

Sole-source awards are typically justified when only one responsible source is capable of providing the required supplies or services. For highly specialized defense components like those for the TRIDENT GUIDANCE system, it's possible that Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. possesses unique technical expertise, proprietary technology, or holds specific patents that make them the only viable supplier. The Department of Defense would have had to conduct a Justification and Approval (J&A) process to document why full and open competition was not feasible or not in the government's best interest, citing factors such as unique capabilities, critical program needs, or lack of alternative sources.

How does the firm fixed-price contract type interact with the sole-source award in terms of risk and value?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally favorable for the government as it establishes a ceiling price, shifting the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. However, when combined with a sole-source award, the benefit of FFP is diminished. While the contractor bears the risk of exceeding the agreed-upon price, the initial price itself was not determined through competitive negotiation. This means the government might have agreed to a higher price than would have been achieved in a competitive environment, even though the contractor is responsible for managing costs within that price.

What is the historical spending pattern for TRIDENT GUIDANCE components or similar items from this contractor?

The provided data shows a single award of $47,007,240 for TRIDENT GUIDANCE parts from 2009 to 2012. To assess historical spending patterns, one would need to examine broader contract databases for prior or subsequent awards to Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. for similar components or services, as well as spending by the Department of the Navy on the TRIDENT program overall. Without access to more comprehensive historical data, it's impossible to determine if this $47 million award represents a typical or anomalous level of spending for these specific components or for the contractor's involvement in the TRIDENT program.

What are the potential implications of relying on a single contractor for such critical defense components?

Relying on a single contractor for critical defense components like TRIDENT GUIDANCE parts can create significant strategic risks. It fosters a dependency that can be exploited by the contractor through price increases or by external factors affecting the contractor's operations (e.g., financial instability, labor disputes, or geopolitical issues impacting their facilities). Furthermore, it can stifle innovation as there is less incentive for alternative solutions to emerge. The government may face challenges in ensuring long-term supply chain resilience and may have limited leverage if the contractor's performance or pricing becomes unsatisfactory.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: GUIDED MISSLES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: N0003010Q0006

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 555 TECHNOLOGY SQUARE, CAMBRIDGE, MA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Federally Funded Research and Development Corp, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $47,004,724

Exercised Options: $47,004,724

Current Obligation: $47,004,724

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline