DoD's $1.63 billion SANDBLASTER R&D contract awarded to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,316,491 ($16.3M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-03-08

End Date: 2009-05-15

Contract Duration: 799 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: SANDBLASTER

Place of Performance

Location: STRATFORD, FAIRFIELD County, CONNECTICUT, 06614

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $16.3 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION for work described as: SANDBLASTER Key points: 1. Contract awarded for Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences. 2. Significant investment in advanced technology development by the Department of the Army. 3. Contract duration of 799 days indicates a substantial R&D effort. 4. Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type suggests potential for cost overruns if not managed closely. 5. No small business set-aside indicates a focus on large prime contractors for this effort. 6. Awarded under the 'CT' (Contract Type) designation, requiring further clarification on its specific meaning.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while common for R&D, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if the scope is not tightly controlled or if unforeseen technical challenges arise. Benchmarking the value of this $1.63 billion R&D effort is challenging without specific deliverables or performance metrics. However, the substantial investment suggests a high expectation for technological advancement. Comparing it to similar large-scale R&D contracts within the defense sector would be necessary for a more precise value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' suggesting that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This typically fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and innovation. The number of bidders is not specified, which limits the ability to fully assess the intensity of the competition. However, the full and open nature is a positive indicator for market-driven pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple companies to offer their best solutions and pricing, leading to a more efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and potentially the U.S. military, through the development of advanced technologies. The contract supports research and development activities, likely leading to new or improved defense capabilities. The geographic impact is centered in Connecticut, where Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation is based. Workforce implications include employment for scientists, engineers, and support staff involved in the R&D process.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the return on investment.
The substantial dollar amount raises questions about the efficiency and necessity of the R&D scope.
Limited information on the number of bidders in the full and open competition.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a broad search for the best solution.
Significant investment in R&D suggests a commitment to technological superiority.
Contractor, Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, is a well-established entity in the aerospace and defense industry.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The aerospace and defense industry is a major consumer of R&D funding, with significant government investment aimed at maintaining technological advantages. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale R&D contracts awarded by the DoD for advanced technology development, particularly in areas related to aviation and defense systems.

Small Business Impact

The absence of a small business set-aside (sb: false) indicates that this contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses. Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, as the prime contractor, is a large entity. While large prime contractors are often required to subcontract portions of their work to small businesses, the specific subcontracting plan and its impact on the small business ecosystem are not detailed in the provided data. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, requiring detailed reporting and justification of costs. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, but specific oversight reports or Inspector General investigations related to this particular contract are not detailed here.

Related Government Programs

Defense Research and Development
Aerospace Technology Development
Advanced Engineering Projects
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost escalation.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Limited information on the number of bidders in the competition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $16.3 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION. SANDBLASTER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $16.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-03-08. End: 2009-05-15.

What specific technological advancements or capabilities was this $1.63 billion SANDBLASTER R&D contract intended to achieve?

The provided data indicates the contract (SANDBLASTER) was awarded to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION by the Department of the Army for Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (NAICS 541710). The specific technological advancements or capabilities are not detailed in the abbreviated data. However, given the contractor's specialization in rotorcraft and the substantial funding of $1.63 billion over a period of 799 days (approximately 2.2 years), it is highly probable that the R&D focused on next-generation helicopter technologies, advanced materials, propulsion systems, avionics, or potentially unmanned aerial systems. Such significant investment typically aims to achieve breakthroughs in areas like increased speed, payload capacity, survivability, reduced operational costs, or enhanced mission effectiveness for military aviation platforms.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this R&D effort compare to other contract types used for similar defense research projects?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common for research and development efforts where the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, and there is a high degree of uncertainty regarding costs and technical outcomes. In such cases, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee representing profit. This contrasts with Fixed-Price contracts, which are more suitable when requirements are well-defined and risks are lower, offering greater cost certainty for the government. For defense R&D, other common types include Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), which incentivizes cost savings, and Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF), which links a portion of the fee to performance. The CPFF used for SANDBLASTER suggests a focus on exploring new technologies where precise cost estimation is difficult, but it also necessitates robust government oversight to manage potential cost growth and ensure value for money.

What is the historical spending pattern for Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation with the Department of Defense, and how does this contract fit within that pattern?

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin, has a long and extensive history of contracting with the Department of Defense (DoD), primarily for the development and production of helicopters and related systems. Their portfolio includes iconic platforms like the Black Hawk, Seahawk, and Pave Hawk. Historical spending patterns would show consistent, often multi-billion dollar, awards for aircraft procurement, sustainment, and R&D. The $1.63 billion SANDBLASTER contract represents a significant R&D investment, aligning with Sikorsky's core competencies and the DoD's continuous need for technological advancement in rotary-wing and potentially vertical lift aircraft. This specific contract's size and R&D focus suggest it is part of a larger strategic initiative to maintain or enhance U.S. military aviation capabilities.

What are the potential risks associated with a $1.63 billion R&D contract awarded under a Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, and what mitigation strategies might be in place?

The primary risks associated with a $1.63 billion R&D contract under a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure include potential cost overruns, scope creep, and a lack of strong incentive for the contractor to control costs. Since the contractor is reimbursed for actual costs plus a fixed profit, there's less financial pressure to be efficient compared to fixed-price contracts. Mitigation strategies employed by the Department of the Army would likely include rigorous oversight of contractor expenditures, detailed progress reviews, clearly defined milestones and deliverables, and strong program management to ensure the R&D stays aligned with objectives. Furthermore, the government would likely have clauses allowing for adjustments or termination if performance deviates significantly or if costs become unmanageable. Effective communication and a collaborative relationship between the government and contractor are also crucial for managing these risks.

Given the 'full and open competition' award, what does the absence of specific bidder numbers imply about the competitive landscape for this type of advanced R&D contract?

While 'full and open competition' signifies that all eligible sources were allowed to bid, the absence of specific bidder numbers in the provided data makes it difficult to definitively assess the intensity of the competition for the SANDBLASTER R&D contract. In highly specialized fields like advanced aerospace R&D, the number of capable bidders might be limited due to the technical expertise, facilities, and security clearances required. If only a few companies could realistically compete, the 'full and open' nature might still result in less price pressure than in broader markets. Conversely, if multiple highly qualified firms submitted proposals, it would indicate a robust competitive environment, likely driving innovation and value. Without knowing the number of bidders, it's challenging to conclude whether the competition effectively drove down costs or spurred maximum innovation.

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 › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: RTX Corp (UEI: 001344142)

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $16,316,491

Exercised Options: $16,316,491

Current Obligation: $16,316,491

Timeline