DoD Awards $82.6M for Airborne Radio/TV Comm Equipment to MIDSCO Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,651,105 ($31.7M)

Contractor: Midsco Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1996-12-05

End Date: 2004-12-31

Contract Duration: 2,948 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 199712!1700!0856!D0221!SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS !N0003994C0008 !A!*!P00029 !19961205!19981018!826217283!826217283!826217283!N!0K633!MIDSCO, INC !710 ROUTE 46 E !FAIRFIELD !NJ!07004!22410!025!34!FAIRFIELD !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!0001!+000035250909!N!N!000000000000!5821!RADIO AND TV COMM EQUIPMENT, AIRBORNE !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !8711!3!*!*!C!B!N!Z!B !N!R!1!001!N!4A!Z!N!Z!* !* !N!C!*!Z!Z!A!A!A!*!* !*!N!A!B!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: WAYNE, PASSAIC County, NEW JERSEY, 07474

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.7 million to MIDSCO INC. for work described as: 199712!1700!0856!D0221!SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS !N0003994C0008 !A!*!P00029 !19961205!19981018!826217283!826217283!826217283!N!0K633!MIDSCO, INC !710 ROUTE 46 E !FAIRFIELD !NJ!07004!22410!025!34!FAIRFIELD !MONMOU… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for specialized airborne communication equipment. 2. Significant value of $82.6 million over nearly 8 years. 3. Limited competition due to contract type and potential specialized needs. 4. Sector focus on Defense electronics and communication systems.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value is $82.6 million. Without specific unit details or comparable contract data, a precise per-unit cost assessment is not possible. The pricing structure is Cost Plus Award Fee, which can lead to variability.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not available for competition, indicating a limited or sole-source approach. This limits price discovery and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of robust competition may result in higher costs for taxpayers compared to a fully competitive procurement.

Public Impact

Enhances military communication capabilities for airborne platforms. Supports national defense through specialized electronic equipment. Long-term contract duration suggests critical and ongoing need.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Limited competition
  • Cost Plus Award Fee structure
  • Lack of detailed pricing justification

Positive Signals

  • Supports critical defense systems
  • Long-term commitment to a specific vendor

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically for electronics and communication equipment. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining military technological superiority, with benchmarks varying widely based on system complexity and quantity.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication in the provided data whether small businesses were involved as subcontractors or partners in this contract. Further investigation would be needed to determine small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of the Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command. Oversight would typically involve monitoring performance, costs, and adherence to contract terms by the contracting officer and relevant program managers.

Related Government Programs

  • Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Department of the Navy Programs

Risk Flags

  • Limited competition
  • Cost Plus Award Fee structure
  • Lack of detailed justification for sole-source award
  • Potential for cost overruns
  • Long contract duration without clear performance benchmarks

Tags

other-communications-equipment-manufactu, department-of-defense, nj, dca, 10m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.7 million to MIDSCO INC.. 199712!1700!0856!D0221!SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS !N0003994C0008 !A!*!P00029 !19961205!19981018!826217283!826217283!826217283!N!0K633!MIDSCO, INC !710 ROUTE 46 E !FAIRFIELD !NJ!07004!22410!025!34!FAIRFIELD !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!0001!+000035250909!N!N!000000000000!5821!RADIO AND TV COMM EQUIPMENT, AIRBORNE !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !8711!3!*!*!C!B!N!Z!B !N!R!1!0

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MIDSCO 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 $31.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1996-12-05. End: 2004-12-31.

What was the justification for limiting competition on this contract?

The data indicates the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'. This suggests a sole-source award, likely due to proprietary technology, unique capabilities, or specific national security requirements that only MIDSCO, Inc. could fulfill at the time of award. Without further documentation, the precise reason remains unspecified.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee structure impact overall cost and risk?

A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract allows the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a base fee and an award amount. The award amount is determined by the government based on performance against pre-defined criteria. This structure incentivizes performance but can lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if award criteria are not tightly managed or if costs escalate unexpectedly.

What is the estimated taxpayer impact of the limited competition and CPAF structure?

The combination of limited competition and a CPAF structure presents a potential risk of increased taxpayer cost. Limited competition reduces the downward pressure on pricing, while CPAF allows for cost recovery plus an incentive fee. Without detailed performance metrics and cost breakdowns, it's difficult to quantify the exact impact, but it suggests a higher likelihood of paying a premium compared to a competitive, fixed-price contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingCommunications Equipment ManufacturingOther Communications Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Address: 710 ROUTE 46 E, FAIRFIELD, NJ, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline

Start Date: 1996-12-05

Current End Date: 2004-12-31

Potential End Date: 2004-12-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2008-02-12

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending