DoD's $13.5M contract for tank components awarded to Kidde Technologies Inc. lacked competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,474,144 ($13.5M)

Contractor: Kidde Technologies Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-10-01

End Date: 2009-09-30

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $37.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: TFSK

Place of Performance

Location: GOLETA, SANTA BARBARA County, CALIFORNIA, 93117

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.5 million to KIDDE TECHNOLOGIES INC for work described as: TFSK Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, indicating a potential lack of competitive pressure on pricing. 2. The duration of the contract was one year, suggesting a need for ongoing supply of these components. 3. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code points to manufacturing of military armored vehicles and components. 5. The contract type was Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 6. The contract was awarded in California, a state with a significant defense industrial base.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without comparable sole-source awards for similar tank components. The firm fixed price structure is standard for this type of procurement. However, the absence of competition raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible price. Further analysis would require understanding the specific components procured and their market value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one bidder was solicited. This typically occurs when a unique capability or proprietary technology is required, or in cases of urgent need where competition is not feasible. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no direct price comparison or negotiation leverage derived from a competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government does not benefit from the price reductions typically achieved through competitive bidding.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army, receiving critical components for military armored vehicles and tanks. The services delivered involve the manufacturing and supply of specialized tank components. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the contractor is located and the components are likely manufactured. Workforce implications include employment at Kidde Technologies Inc. and potentially its suppliers within the defense manufacturing sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than a competed award.
Sole-source awards can limit the government's ability to explore innovative solutions from a wider range of suppliers.
Dependence on a single supplier for critical components can create supply chain risks.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract structure shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Award to an established entity like Kidde Technologies Inc. suggests a known capability for producing these components.

Sector Analysis

The defense manufacturing sector, particularly for armored vehicles and components, is a specialized area within the broader industrial landscape. This contract falls under the manufacturing of military equipment, a segment often characterized by high technical requirements and limited suppliers. Spending in this sector is driven by national security needs and modernization programs. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other contracts for similar vehicle parts or systems within the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides or subcontracting opportunities. As a sole-source award to a specific company, it is unlikely to have been structured to promote small business participation. The focus was likely on fulfilling a specific requirement with a known provider, rather than broader economic development goals for small businesses.

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 delivery of components according to the firm fixed price contract terms and specifications. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, with less public information available compared to competed contracts.

Related Government Programs

Military Armored Vehicle Manufacturing
Tank Component Procurement
Department of Defense Supply Chain Management
Sole-Source Defense Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.5 million to KIDDE TECHNOLOGIES INC. TFSK

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KIDDE 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 $13.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-10-01. End: 2009-09-30.

What specific tank components were procured under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing' under NAICS code 336992. However, the specific components are not detailed in the summary data. These could range from engine parts, armor plating, track systems, or other critical sub-assemblies necessary for the operation and maintenance of military tanks and armored vehicles. A more granular analysis would require accessing the contract's statement of work or detailed specifications.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis?

Sole-source awards are typically justified when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the requirement. For defense components, this could be due to proprietary technology, unique manufacturing processes, specialized expertise, or urgent and compelling circumstances where competition is not feasible. Without further documentation, the specific justification for this sole-source award to Kidde Technologies Inc. remains unknown, but it implies a perceived necessity for their specific offering.

What is Kidde Technologies Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense?

The data shows Kidde Technologies Inc. was awarded this $13.5 million contract by the Department of the Army. To assess their broader track record, one would need to examine their contract history with the DoD, including the number and value of previous awards, performance ratings, and any past issues or disputes. A company receiving a sole-source award suggests a pre-existing relationship or recognized capability, but a comprehensive review would involve searching federal procurement databases for all their contracts.

How does the $13.5 million value compare to similar tank component contracts?

Direct comparison of the $13.5 million value is difficult without knowing the exact components procured and their market rates. However, for specialized military hardware, this amount could represent a significant procurement for a specific set of parts or a smaller number of complex systems. To benchmark, one would need to identify other DoD contracts for similar tank components, ideally those awarded competitively, to establish a price range and assess value for money.

What are the potential risks associated with this sole-source contract?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source contract is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive pressure. Taxpayers may end up paying more than if the contract had been competed. Additionally, there's a risk of vendor lock-in, where the government becomes dependent on a single supplier, potentially limiting future options or innovation. Supply chain disruptions from this single source could also pose a risk to military readiness.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing › Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MOTOR VEHICLES, CYCLES, TRAILERS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: RTX Corp (UEI: 001344142)

Address: 163 AERO CAMINO, GOLETA, CA, 24

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,474,144

Exercised Options: $13,474,144

Current Obligation: $13,474,144

Timeline