DoD's $10.6M R&D Contract for Electronics & Communication Equipment to Harris Corporation Raises Questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,647,933 ($10.6M)

Contractor: L3harris Technologies, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-03-31

End Date: 2010-04-30

Contract Duration: 1,856 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200506!003035!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !W15P7T05CP013 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050331!20061115!021715206!021715206!004203337!N!HARRIS CORPORATION !2400 PALM BAY RD NE !MELBOURNE !FL!32902!43975!009!12!MELBOURNE !BREVARD !FLORIDA !+000000800000!N!N!000000000000!AC61!RDTE/ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION EQ-BASIC RESEARCH!A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541710!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !N!Z!D!U!U!1!001!N!1G!Z!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: PALM BAY, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32905

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.6 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. for work described as: 200506!003035!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !W15P7T05CP013 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050331!20061115!021715206!021715206!004203337!N!HARRIS CORPORATION !2400 PALM BAY RD NE !MELBOURNE !FL!32902!43975!009!12!MELBOURNE !BREV… Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Harris Corporation for electronics and communication equipment research and development appears to be a sole-source award, potentially limiting competitive pricing. 2. With a value of $10.6 million, the contract's cost-plus-fixed-fee structure warrants scrutiny to ensure efficient use of taxpayer funds. 3. The award falls under the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' NAICS code, a sector often characterized by innovation but also potential cost overruns. 4. The lack of competition is a significant risk factor, suggesting potential for higher prices and reduced innovation compared to a competitive bidding process.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) type, which can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts for electronics and communication equipment is difficult without more detailed cost breakdowns, but the CPFF structure itself suggests a higher risk of cost escalation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source award. This significantly limits price discovery and competition, potentially leading to higher costs for the government and taxpayers. The justification for a sole-source award would be critical to understanding if it was truly necessary.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition in this $10.6 million contract means taxpayers may not have received the best possible price or value, as competitive pressures were absent.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be overpaying for research and development due to the absence of competitive bidding. The Department of Defense is potentially missing out on innovative solutions or cost savings that could have emerged from a competitive process. The long duration of the contract (over 1800 days) for R&D could indicate a lack of clear objectives or scope creep, further impacting value for money.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type
Lack of transparency in pricing
Potential for cost overruns

Positive Signals

Awarded to a known entity (Harris Corporation)
Contract supports R&D in a critical technology area

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on electronics and communication equipment. Spending in this area is crucial for technological advancement but can be prone to cost overruns and requires careful oversight due to the inherent uncertainties in R&D.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. The sole-source nature of the award likely precluded small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this award raises concerns about oversight. Without competitive pressure, there is a greater need for robust government oversight to ensure the contractor is performing efficiently and costs are reasonable. The contract type (CPFF) also necessitates diligent monitoring.

Related Government Programs

Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for inflated costs due to sole-source award
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure can lead to overspending
Limited transparency on performance metrics and outcomes
No indication of small business participation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.6 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.. 200506!003035!2100!W15P7T!USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !W15P7T05CP013 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050331!20061115!021715206!021715206!004203337!N!HARRIS CORPORATION !2400 PALM BAY RD NE !MELBOURNE !FL!32902!43975!009!12!MELBOURNE !BREVARD !FLORIDA !+000000800000!N!N!000000000000!AC61!RDTE/ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION EQ-BASIC RESEARCH!A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541710!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-03-31. End: 2010-04-30.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis, and were alternative competitive strategies considered?

The justification for a sole-source award is critical. Typically, such awards are made when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services. Without this justification, it's difficult to assess if the government adequately explored competitive options, potentially leading to suboptimal pricing and value for taxpayers.

How effectively was the cost-plus-fixed-fee structure managed to control expenditures and ensure value for the $10.6 million investment?

Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts require stringent oversight to prevent cost overruns. Effective management would involve detailed tracking of costs, regular performance reviews, and ensuring the fixed fee remains appropriate for the scope of work. Without transparency into these management practices, it's hard to confirm value for money.

What specific technological advancements or capabilities were achieved through this $10.6 million R&D contract, and do they justify the investment?

The ultimate effectiveness of this R&D contract hinges on the tangible outcomes. Measuring success requires defining clear R&D objectives and assessing whether the achieved advancements in electronics and communication equipment meet or exceed expectations and provide a return on the $10.6 million investment for the Department of Defense.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

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

Parent Company: L3harris Technologies, Inc (UEI: 004203337)

Address: 2400 PALM BAY RD NE, MELBOURNE, FL, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline