Dayton T. Brown Inc. awarded $24.7M for Navy MMS Support Services under existing BOA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,684,119 ($24.7M)

Contractor: Dayton T. Brown, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-03-25

End Date: 2026-03-24

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $33.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: NEW TASK ORDER UNDER THE BOA FOR THE MMS SUPPORT SERVICES.

Place of Performance

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

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.7 million to DAYTON T. BROWN, INC. for work described as: NEW TASK ORDER UNDER THE BOA FOR THE MMS SUPPORT SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract awarded via a sole-source mechanism, raising questions about potential price efficiencies. 2. The contract is a delivery order under a Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA), suggesting a pre-existing relationship. 3. Performance period of 729 days indicates a medium-term commitment for specialized support. 4. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure may incentivize cost escalation if not closely monitored. 5. No small business set-aside was utilized, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms in this segment. 6. The contract falls under 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing', a broad category.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $24.7 million for 729 days of support appears substantial. Without specific deliverables or comparable sole-source contracts for similar MMS support services, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing structure necessitates robust oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and that the fixed fee adequately compensates the contractor for their effort without excessive profit margins. Benchmarking against similar sole-source awards for specialized technical support within the defense sector would be necessary for a more definitive value assessment.

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 approach is typically used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or is the only source capable of meeting the requirement. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery that typically occurs in a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple offers had been solicited.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit taxpayer value by bypassing competitive pressures that drive down prices. This can result in higher overall spending for the government compared to competed contracts for similar services.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from specialized support for its MMS (likely Maintenance, Modification, and Support) systems. This contract ensures the continued operational readiness and effectiveness of critical naval assets. The services delivered are likely technical in nature, involving maintenance, repair, or upgrade of complex systems. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational areas of the Department of the Navy, potentially worldwide. The contract supports specialized technical expertise, potentially impacting a skilled workforce within the aerospace and defense industry.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
Lack of small business participation may exclude smaller, innovative firms from contributing.
The broad 'Other Aircraft Parts' classification might obscure the specific nature and criticality of the services provided.

Positive Signals

Award under an existing BOA suggests a streamlined process and established relationship.
The fixed fee component provides some cost certainty compared to pure cost-reimbursement contracts.
The contract ensures continuity of essential support services for naval operations.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high technological complexity and significant government procurement. Contracts for specialized support services, like those for aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment, are crucial for maintaining the operational readiness of military fleets. Dayton T. Brown, Inc. operates within this specialized niche. The total federal spending on 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' (NAICS 336413) can be substantial, with individual contracts varying widely in value based on the specific systems and support required. This contract represents a portion of that broader spending landscape.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses indicated in the provided data. This means that opportunities for small businesses to directly participate in this specific contract are limited. While Dayton T. Brown, Inc. may engage small businesses as subcontractors through their own supply chain, the absence of a formal set-aside or subcontracting plan means there's no direct mechanism to ensure small business inclusion or to foster their growth within this particular procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. As a sole-source award under a BOA, the existing framework of the BOA likely includes some level of oversight. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure necessitates detailed financial reporting and auditing by the contractor to justify incurred costs and the fixed fee. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract performance metrics and financial reviews are standard oversight mechanisms. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance and Repair Services
Aerospace Parts Manufacturing
Defense Logistics Support
Naval Aviation Support Programs
Basic Ordering Agreements (BOA) Management

Risk Flags

Sole-source award requires strong justification to ensure fair pricing.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts need diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals may limit opportunities for smaller firms.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.7 million to DAYTON T. BROWN, INC.. NEW TASK ORDER UNDER THE BOA FOR THE MMS SUPPORT SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DAYTON T. BROWN, 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 $24.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-03-25. End: 2026-03-24.

What is the specific nature of the MMS support services being provided under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'MMS Support Services' under the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' NAICS code. MMS typically stands for Maintenance, Modification, and Support. Therefore, the services likely involve the maintenance, repair, overhaul, or modification of specific aircraft components, systems, or related equipment utilized by the Department of the Navy. Without further details on the specific 'MMS' system or the Statement of Work, the exact technical tasks remain generalized. However, given the contractor's industry classification, it points towards specialized technical support for aviation-related hardware.

How does the $24.7 million value compare to similar sole-source contracts for aircraft support services?

Benchmarking this $24.7 million sole-source contract against similar sole-source awards for aircraft support services is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of historical sole-source procurements with detailed scopes of work. However, for specialized technical support, maintenance, or modification services for complex defense systems, contract values in the tens of millions of dollars over a period of approximately two years are not uncommon. The key factor for value assessment would be the criticality of the systems supported, the uniqueness of the contractor's capabilities, and the absence of viable alternatives. A sole-source award inherently bypasses competitive benchmarking, making direct comparisons difficult and emphasizing the need for strong justification from the awarding agency.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this service?

The primary risk with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract is the potential for cost escalation. While the contractor is paid their actual allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee, there is less incentive for the contractor to control costs compared to fixed-price contracts. If the contractor's costs increase significantly, the government pays those increased costs. The fixed fee, however, remains constant, meaning the contractor's profit margin can decrease if costs rise substantially. This necessitates rigorous government oversight, detailed cost tracking, and auditing to ensure that all claimed costs are reasonable, allocable, and necessary for contract performance. Without effective oversight, the government could end up paying more than anticipated.

What is Dayton T. Brown, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense, particularly for sole-source awards?

Dayton T. Brown, Inc. has a history of receiving contracts from the Department of Defense, primarily within the aerospace and defense manufacturing sector. Information regarding their specific track record with sole-source awards would require a deeper dive into contract databases. However, their continued receipt of contracts suggests a level of performance and capability that meets DoD requirements. For sole-source awards, agencies must justify why competition is not feasible. The fact that they were awarded this contract sole-source implies they possess specific qualifications or capabilities deemed essential by the Navy, likely stemming from prior work or unique expertise.

How does this contract fit into the broader spending patterns for aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing by the Navy?

This $24.7 million contract represents a specific task order under a larger framework (BOA) for specialized support services within the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' category. The Navy's overall spending in this sector is substantial, encompassing research, development, procurement of new parts, and ongoing sustainment and maintenance of its vast aircraft fleet. This contract contributes to the sustainment aspect, ensuring the operational readiness of existing assets. Its value is moderate within the context of major defense procurements, but critical for the specific systems it supports. It reflects a pattern of the Navy utilizing specialized contractors for niche technical support rather than performing all work in-house.

What are the potential implications of this contract not being competed for small business participation?

The primary implication of this contract not being competed is the missed opportunity for small businesses to directly compete for and win this work. Federal acquisition regulations often prioritize small business set-asides to foster their growth and participation in the defense industrial base. By awarding this sole-source, the Navy has bypassed a mechanism that could have specifically allocated a portion of this $24.7 million to small businesses. While the prime contractor, Dayton T. Brown, Inc., may utilize small businesses in its supply chain, the lack of a direct set-aside or subcontracting requirement means there is no guaranteed pathway for small business involvement, potentially limiting their access to significant contract revenue.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MODIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT › MODIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT

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: 1175 CHURCH STREET, BOHEMIA, NY, 11716

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $82,804,759

Exercised Options: $44,676,765

Current Obligation: $24,684,119

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0042123G0005

IDV Type: BOA

Timeline