Department of Defense awards $15.1M for flight demonstration services, with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,156,149 ($15.2M)

Contractor: Calspan, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-10-01

End Date: 2026-03-31

Contract Duration: 2,007 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: FLIGHT DEMONSTRATION SERVICES (OM&N)

Place of Performance

Location: PATUXENT RIVER, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20670

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.2 million to CALSPAN, LLC for work described as: FLIGHT DEMONSTRATION SERVICES (OM&N) Key points: 1. Contract awarded to CALSPAN, LLC for flight training and operations. 2. The contract duration spans over 5 years, indicating a long-term need. 3. A firm-fixed-price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government. 4. The award was not competed, raising questions about potential cost savings. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 611512 points to specialized flight training services. 6. The contract is a definitive contract, suggesting a clear scope of work. 7. The base year value is approximately $7.55M, with potential for growth.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar flight demonstration services. The firm-fixed-price structure offers cost certainty, but the lack of competition means there's no direct market comparison to assess if the price is optimal. The base year value of $7.55M for approximately 2007 days of performance suggests a daily rate, but without knowing the specific services rendered, it's difficult to judge value for money.

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 among multiple vendors. This typically occurs when only one vendor possesses the unique capabilities or resources required for the service. While this can ensure specialized needs are met, it limits the government's ability to leverage competitive pricing and potentially discover more cost-effective solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition means taxpayers may not be receiving the most advantageous pricing available in the market. Without a competitive bidding process, there is less pressure on the contractor to offer the lowest possible price.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from specialized flight demonstration and training services. This contract supports critical training and operational readiness for naval aviation personnel. The services are likely to be performed in Maryland, based on the 'ST' and 'SN' codes. The contract supports specialized technical expertise in flight operations and testing.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Sole-source awards can limit innovation by excluding potential new entrants.
Performance metrics and oversight are crucial to ensure value in non-competed contracts.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Long contract duration suggests a stable, ongoing requirement.
Specialized nature of the service may justify a sole-source award if unique capabilities are required.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high barriers to entry, specialized technical requirements, and significant government spending. Flight demonstration and training services fall within this domain, often requiring unique aircraft, testing facilities, and highly skilled personnel. This contract represents a portion of the broader government investment in maintaining and advancing aviation capabilities, where specialized contractors play a vital role.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract includes small business set-asides. Given the specialized nature of flight demonstration services and the sole-source award, it is unlikely that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses will be a primary focus unless explicitly mandated. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. As a definitive contract, its performance is subject to standard government oversight, including contract surveillance and performance reviews. Transparency regarding the justification for the sole-source award and the contractor's performance reporting would be key accountability measures.

Related Government Programs

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) flight training programs
Department of Defense aviation research and development
Airborne systems testing and evaluation
Specialized flight operations support

Risk Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for cost overruns if estimates are inaccurate
Limited transparency on specific service details

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.2 million to CALSPAN, LLC. FLIGHT DEMONSTRATION SERVICES (OM&N)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CALSPAN, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-10-01. End: 2026-03-31.

What specific flight demonstration capabilities does CALSPAN, LLC provide under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'FLIGHT DEMONSTRATION SERVICES (OM&N)' under NAICS code 611512 (Flight Training). While specific details are not itemized, this typically encompasses services such as operating specialized aircraft for testing and evaluation, demonstrating new technologies or aircraft systems, providing aerial platforms for sensor testing, and potentially offering flight training for specific operational needs. The 'OM&N' likely refers to Operations, Maintenance, and Navigation, suggesting a comprehensive service package. The firm-fixed-price nature implies a defined scope of services for a set price, but the exact nature of the demonstrations (e.g., aerodynamic testing, weapons system integration, electronic warfare simulation) would require further contract document review.

How does the $15.1M contract value compare to similar flight demonstration services awarded by the DoD?

Directly comparing the $15.1M total contract value to similar flight demonstration services is difficult without access to a broader dataset of comparable sole-source or competed contracts with identical scopes. However, for a contract spanning over five years (October 2020 to March 2026), this value suggests an average annual expenditure of approximately $3 million. This figure needs to be contextualized by the complexity and duration of the flight hours, the type of aircraft utilized, and the specialized equipment or personnel involved. Given the sole-source nature, a direct price-to-price comparison with competitively awarded contracts is not feasible, but it highlights the significant investment required for such specialized aviation support.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for flight demonstration services?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source award for flight demonstration services is the potential for inflated costs due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bidders vying for the contract, the government may not achieve the most cost-effective pricing. Another risk is the potential for complacency from the awarded contractor, as there is no immediate threat of losing future business to competitors. Furthermore, a sole-source award might overlook innovative solutions or more efficient service delivery methods that could have been proposed by other qualified vendors. Ensuring robust oversight and performance management becomes critical to mitigate these risks and verify that the government is receiving fair value.

What is the historical spending pattern for flight demonstration services by the Department of the Navy?

Analyzing the historical spending patterns for flight demonstration services by the Department of the Navy requires access to historical contract databases beyond the provided data. However, the duration of this current contract (over 5 years) suggests a sustained requirement for such services. The base year value of approximately $7.55M for roughly 2007 days (around 5.5 years) indicates a significant and ongoing investment. Typically, the Navy utilizes such services for testing new platforms, validating system upgrades, and providing realistic training environments. Fluctuations in spending would likely correlate with major acquisition programs, modernization efforts, and evolving threat landscapes requiring advanced aerial demonstrations and testing.

What are the implications of the firm-fixed-price contract type for this flight demonstration service?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type for flight demonstration services offers significant advantages in terms of cost predictability for the government. Under an FFP agreement, the contractor is obligated to perform the specified work for a predetermined price, regardless of the actual costs incurred. This shifts the cost risk from the government to the contractor. For services like flight demonstrations, where operational costs (fuel, maintenance, personnel) can fluctuate, the FFP structure provides a stable budget baseline. However, it also means that the contractor must accurately estimate all costs upfront, and if their estimates are too low, they bear the loss. Conversely, if their estimates are high, the government may end up paying a premium compared to a cost-reimbursable contract, especially if the contractor is highly efficient.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Technical and Trade Schools › Flight Training

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: N0042120R0140

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4455 GENESEE ST, BUFFALO, NY, 14225

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,696,981

Exercised Options: $15,860,381

Current Obligation: $15,156,149

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline