Northrop Grumman awarded $16.1M for R&D support, with 4 bids received
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $16,100,938 ($16.1M)
Contractor: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-04-29
End Date: 2014-10-31
Contract Duration: 2,011 days
Daily Burn Rate: $8.0K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22204, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $16.1 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION for work described as: BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the R&D nature and duration. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for these services. 3. No immediate red flags on risk indicators, but long-term performance is key. 4. This contract falls within the broader R&D sector for defense information systems. 5. The firm fixed-price structure shifts performance risk to the contractor. 6. The award was made under the "Other" contract type, likely indicating a specific service category.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The $16.1 million award for BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES over approximately 6 years (2009-2014) represents a significant investment in R&D support. Benchmarking this against similar R&D contracts is challenging without more specific service details, but the firm fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope. The number of bids (4) indicates a competitive environment that likely contributed to a fair price. The contractor, Northrop Grumman, is a large, established entity with extensive government contracting experience.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The solicitation resulted in four distinct proposals, indicating a moderate level of competition for this R&D support service. While four bidders suggest some market interest, it's not an exceptionally high number, which could imply a specialized niche or high barriers to entry for some potential contractors.
Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to vie for the contract, potentially driving down costs through competitive pricing. The presence of four bidders suggests that the government received a reasonable range of options and pricing.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), receiving essential R&D support. The services provided are crucial for the accreditation of systems, ensuring security and compliance. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around DISA facilities and contractor locations, primarily in Virginia. Workforce implications include specialized R&D personnel and support staff employed by Northrop Grumman.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for scope creep in R&D projects if not tightly managed.
- Reliance on a single large contractor for critical support services.
- Long-term sustainment costs beyond the initial contract period are unknown.
Positive Signals
- Award to a well-established contractor with a strong track record in defense.
- Firm fixed-price contract aligns incentives for cost control.
- Competition ensures a baseline level of market validation for the service.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences, excluding biotechnology. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541712 confirms this focus. The defense industry is a significant consumer of R&D services, with agencies like DISA constantly seeking to advance technological capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within R&D budgets of similar defense agencies or large-scale technology development programs.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. The award to a large prime contractor like Northrop Grumman suggests that the primary focus was on capability and capacity rather than small business participation goals. This could mean limited direct opportunities for small businesses on this specific contract, though they may be involved further down the supply chain.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officers and program managers within the Defense Information Systems Agency. As a Department of Defense contract, it would also be subject to the oversight of the Department of Defense Inspector General. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific performance metrics and oversight activities are often internal.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) IT Support Contracts
- Department of Defense Research and Development Programs
- System Accreditation and Compliance Services
- Northrop Grumman Defense Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if R&D scope is not tightly managed.
- Contractor performance risk on complex R&D tasks.
- Long-term reliance on external support for critical functions.
Tags
research-and-development, department-of-defense, defense-information-systems-agency, northrop-grumman-systems-corporation, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, basic-accreditation-support-services, virginia, information-technology-support, r&d-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $16.1 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION. BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Information Systems Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $16.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-04-29. End: 2014-10-31.
What is Northrop Grumman's track record with similar R&D support contracts for the Department of Defense?
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation is a major defense contractor with extensive experience across various R&D and support services for the Department of Defense. They have a long history of managing complex projects, including those related to system development, integration, and research. While this specific contract for BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES is detailed, their broader portfolio includes work on advanced technologies, cybersecurity, and information systems. Analyzing their past performance on similar firm-fixed-price R&D contracts, particularly those with DISA or other defense agencies, would reveal their ability to deliver within scope, budget, and schedule. Publicly available contract databases and performance reviews (if accessible) can provide insights into their historical success rates, any past issues, and their overall reputation for executing R&D-intensive work.
How does the $16.1 million value compare to similar R&D support contracts awarded by DISA?
The $16.1 million total award value for BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES, spanning approximately six years, translates to an average annual value of roughly $2.68 million. Comparing this to similar R&D support contracts awarded by DISA requires access to a comprehensive database of federal contracts and the ability to filter by agency, NAICS code (541712), and contract type. Generally, R&D support services can vary widely in cost depending on the complexity, duration, and specific technical expertise required. A contract of this size for a large, established entity like Northrop Grumman suggests a significant scope of work, potentially involving specialized accreditation processes or research into new technologies. Without direct comparative data on contracts with identical service descriptions, it's difficult to definitively benchmark the value, but the number of bidders (4) suggests the price was deemed competitive within the market for these services at the time of award.
What are the primary risks associated with this type of R&D support contract?
The primary risks associated with this R&D support contract include technical risks, schedule risks, and cost risks, although the firm fixed-price (FFP) structure mitigates some cost uncertainty for the government. Technical risks involve the possibility that the research or support services may not yield the desired outcomes or meet evolving accreditation standards. Schedule risks can arise from unforeseen technical challenges, changes in requirements, or contractor performance issues, potentially delaying critical system accreditation. For an FFP contract, the contractor bears the primary financial risk if costs exceed estimates. However, risks for the government can still include contractor underperformance, potential for scope creep if requirements are not well-defined, and the long-term implications of relying on external support for critical functions. Ensuring robust oversight and clear performance metrics are crucial to managing these risks.
How effective is the firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type in managing costs for R&D services?
The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective in managing costs for services where the scope of work can be clearly defined, even within R&D. For the government, FFP provides cost certainty, as the price is fixed regardless of the contractor's actual costs. This shifts the financial risk of cost overruns to the contractor, incentivizing them to manage their expenses efficiently. In the context of R&D support, FFP works best when the objectives and deliverables are well-understood, such as supporting accreditation processes. However, if the R&D involves significant unknowns or evolving requirements, an FFP contract might be less suitable or require very precise initial scope definition to avoid disputes or change orders. The success of FFP in R&D often hinges on the clarity of the statement of work and the contractor's ability to accurately estimate their costs upfront.
What does the 'Other' contract type designation signify in this context?
The 'Other' contract type designation (indicated by 'AW': 'DO') in federal procurement typically refers to a contract that doesn't fit neatly into standard categories like fixed-price, cost-reimbursement, or time-and-materials. In this specific case, the 'AW' code likely corresponds to a specific type of 'Other' contract used by the Defense Information Systems Agency or the Department of Defense. Without further context or access to the specific FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulation) clauses associated with this code, it's difficult to pinpoint the exact nature. However, 'Other' contracts can sometimes be used for unique service agreements, interagency agreements, or specialized support where standard contract types are not optimal. Given the 'BASIC ACCREDITATION SUPPORT SERVICES' description and the R&D NAICS code, it might represent a tailored service agreement designed for specific accreditation support functions that required a unique contractual structure.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Corporation (UEI: 967356127)
Address: 4807 STONECROFT BLVD, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $17,018,906
Exercised Options: $16,122,877
Current Obligation: $16,100,938
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: HC102808D2023
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-04-29
Current End Date: 2014-10-31
Potential End Date: 2014-10-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2016-02-17
More Contracts from Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
- 200506!000026!5700!fa8214!oo-Alc/Pkme/Lmke !F4261098C0001 !A!N! !Y! !p01502!20041213!20050701!001563738!004179453!016435559!n!northrop Grumman Space & Missi!888 S 2000 E !clearfield !ut!84015!13850!011!49!clearfield !davis !utah !-000001960000!n!n!000000000000!l014!tech REP Svcs/Guided Missiles !A2 !missile and Space Systems !302 !minuteman III GRP !541330!E! !3! ! !C! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!n!l!2!002!b! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $10.0B (Department of Defense)
- E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Aircraft (FRP-7) — $8.5B (Department of Defense)
- E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Aircraft (FRP-2) — $5.4B (Department of Defense)
- First DDT and E, Ares I-X, and Flight Tests. First Stage Will BE a Five Segment, Solid Rocket Booster Derived From the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) Solid Rocket Booster (srb)/Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (rsrm). the Contractor Shall Furnish the Necessary Management, Engineering, Labor, Facilities, Tools, Equipment, and Materials Required for First Stage Development, Qualification, Certification and Acceptance Program. Activities Include: Redesign and Testing of the Motor to Incorporate the Fifth Segment and Production of Five Full Scale Ground Static Test Motors: TWO Development Motors (dms)-And Three Qualification Motors (QMS); Structural Test Article (STA), Ground Vibration Test Motors (gvtms) and Other Development Testing; Redesign of the Avionics, Deceleration, Separation, and Flight Termination System (FTS) Subsystems; Ares I-X: Simulated Ares I Outer Mold Line/Mass Properties Using Modified Srb/Rsrm; and Three Flight Test Vehicles. TAS::80 0124::TAS — $4.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Federal Contract — $4.4B (Department of Defense)
View all Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation federal contracts →
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)