DoD's $27.8M contract for broadcasting equipment awarded to Sierra Nevada Company, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,806,015 ($27.8M)

Contractor: Sierra Nevada Company, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-08-10

End Date: 2025-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,420 days

Daily Burn Rate: $19.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NGLD-M

Place of Performance

Location: SPARKS, WASHOE County, NEVADA, 89434

State: Nevada Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.8 million to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC for work described as: NGLD-M Key points: 1. Value for money assessed through comparison with similar contracts and market rates. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a robust bidding process for this requirement. 3. Risk indicators are being monitored for potential performance or delivery issues. 4. Performance context is evaluated against historical contract data and industry standards. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader defense communications market.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar procurements for specialized broadcasting equipment. While specific per-unit cost data is not publicly available for direct comparison, the overall award amount aligns with the scope and duration of the services. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, mitigating risk of cost overruns. Further analysis would involve comparing the specific technical capabilities and features of the equipment procured against market alternatives.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of five bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and ensures that the government receives offers from a range of qualified vendors, potentially driving down costs and improving the quality of the offered solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment among multiple vendors.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense is the primary beneficiary, receiving critical broadcasting equipment. This contract supports the delivery of essential wireless communications capabilities. The geographic impact is primarily within Nevada, where the contractor is based. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles within Sierra Nevada Company.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive marketplace.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty.
Contract duration of over 3 years allows for sustained support and delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing sector. This industry is characterized by rapid technological advancements and specialized production capabilities. The market size for defense-related communications equipment is substantial, driven by ongoing modernization efforts and operational needs. This contract represents a specific procurement within the broader defense industrial base for advanced wireless technology.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears limited for this specific award. However, the prime contractor, Sierra Nevada Company, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which would require further investigation into their subcontracting plans.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified goods and services. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics are often not publicly disclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Communications Systems
Wireless Broadcasting Equipment
Military Communications Technology

Risk Flags

Potential for technical obsolescence in rapidly evolving wireless technology.
Risk of delivery delays impacting operational timelines.
Ensuring performance meets stringent military specifications.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.8 million to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC. NGLD-M

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $27.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-08-10. End: 2025-06-30.

What is the track record of Sierra Nevada Company, LLC in fulfilling government contracts, particularly within the defense sector?

Sierra Nevada Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Sierra Nevada Corporation, has a significant history of performing contracts for the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense. They specialize in a wide range of aerospace and defense technologies, including advanced communications, electronic warfare, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) systems. Their track record generally includes successful delivery of complex systems and components. While specific performance metrics for individual contracts are not always public, their sustained presence and continued awards suggest a generally positive performance history. However, as with any large defense contractor, there may be instances of past performance issues or contract disputes that warrant a deeper review of their specific history related to similar broadcasting equipment procurements.

How does the awarded amount of $27.8 million compare to similar procurements for broadcasting and wireless communications equipment by the Department of Defense?

Benchmarking the $27.8 million award requires comparing it to contracts for similar types and quantities of broadcasting and wireless communications equipment. Given the specialized nature of defense-grade equipment, direct comparisons can be challenging. However, preliminary analysis suggests that this amount is within a reasonable range for a multi-year contract involving advanced technology for a major defense agency. Factors such as the specific technical specifications, required quantities, integration services, and warranty periods significantly influence pricing. Without access to detailed technical requirements and a broader market survey of comparable systems, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. However, the firm-fixed-price nature and the competitive award process provide some assurance of reasonable pricing.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Primary risks for this contract include potential technical obsolescence of the broadcasting equipment due to rapid technological advancements, delivery delays impacting operational readiness, and performance issues if the equipment does not meet stringent military specifications. Contractor performance risk is also a factor, although mitigated by the firm-fixed-price structure. Mitigation strategies likely include robust government oversight, clear performance metrics outlined in the contract, phased delivery schedules, and potentially penalties for non-compliance or delays. The contractor's own quality assurance processes and technical expertise are also key to mitigating these risks. The relatively long contract duration (over three years) could also introduce risks related to changing requirements or budget fluctuations, necessitating careful program management.

What is the expected effectiveness of the procured broadcasting equipment in supporting Department of Defense operations?

The effectiveness of the procured broadcasting equipment is expected to be high, given that it is intended for use by the Department of Defense, which typically procures systems meeting rigorous operational standards. This equipment likely supports critical functions such as secure communications, information dissemination, or potentially electronic warfare capabilities. The firm-fixed-price contract and the full and open competition suggest that the selected equipment is intended to meet specific, well-defined operational needs. Its effectiveness will ultimately depend on its integration into existing command and control architectures and its reliability in diverse operational environments. The contract's duration implies a need for sustained operational support and potential upgrades.

How has historical spending on similar broadcasting and wireless communications equipment by the Department of the Army trended over the past five years?

Analyzing historical spending trends for broadcasting and wireless communications equipment by the Department of the Army over the past five years would reveal patterns in investment and technology adoption. Such an analysis would likely show a consistent need for such equipment, driven by modernization initiatives and the replacement of aging systems. Spending may fluctuate based on specific program priorities, technological breakthroughs, and budget allocations. An upward trend might indicate increasing reliance on advanced wireless capabilities, while a stable or declining trend could suggest maturity in existing systems or a shift in procurement focus. This specific $27.8 million contract represents a portion of that historical spending, contributing to the overall investment in this category.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Communications Equipment Manufacturing › Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Sierra Nevada Corporation

Address: 444 SALOMON CIR, SPARKS, NV, 89434

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $34,436,763

Exercised Options: $34,436,763

Current Obligation: $27,806,015

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 33

Total Subaward Amount: $8,415,047

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W15P7T21D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline