DoD awards Boeing $45.5M for Initial Production Fielding Support (IPFS) Net Training

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $45,499,793 ($45.5M)

Contractor: THE Boeing Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2011-05-09

End Date: 2014-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,057 days

Daily Burn Rate: $43.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: INITIAL PRODUCTION FIELDING SUPPORT (IPFS) NET TRAINING

Place of Performance

Location: RIDLEY PARK, DELAWARE County, PENNSYLVANIA, 19078

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $45.5 million to THE BOEING COMPANY for work described as: INITIAL PRODUCTION FIELDING SUPPORT (IPFS) NET TRAINING Key points: 1. Boeing secured a significant contract for critical training support. 2. The contract value is substantial, indicating a major program. 3. Lack of competition raises questions about price discovery and value. 4. Engineering services sector sees significant defense spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract was not competed, making direct price comparisons difficult. Without competitive bids, it's hard to ascertain if the $45.5M represents a fair market price for the services rendered.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded sole-source, meaning there was no competition. This significantly limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition for a $45.5M contract means taxpayers may have overpaid due to the absence of market forces driving down costs.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the sole-source nature of the award. The long duration (over 3 years) for a $45.5M contract warrants scrutiny. Lack of transparency in the procurement process hinders public trust.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for overpayment

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a major defense contractor
Supports critical training needs

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, which is a common area for significant defense spending. Benchmarks for similar large-scale, sole-source engineering support contracts are often difficult to establish due to their unique nature.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this sole-source contract, missing an opportunity to support smaller enterprises.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this award suggests a potential gap in oversight regarding competitive procurement practices. Further review is needed to ensure accountability and cost-effectiveness.

Related Government Programs

Engineering Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competition.
Potential for inflated pricing.
Lack of transparency in procurement.
No small business participation noted.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $45.5 million to THE BOEING COMPANY. INITIAL PRODUCTION FIELDING SUPPORT (IPFS) NET TRAINING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE BOEING COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $45.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-05-09. End: 2014-03-31.

What specific justification was provided for awarding this contract sole-source?

The justification for a sole-source award typically involves circumstances where only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services. This could be due to unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or urgent and compelling needs. Without access to the specific justification document, it's impossible to detail the exact reasons, but it would need to meet strict federal acquisition regulations.

What is the estimated cost savings that could have been achieved through a competitive bidding process?

Estimating precise cost savings without a competitive process is speculative. However, studies consistently show that competitive contracting can yield savings ranging from 10% to 30% or more compared to sole-source awards. For a $45.5M contract, this could translate to millions of dollars in potential savings for taxpayers.

How will the effectiveness of the training provided under this contract be measured and validated?

The effectiveness of the training should be measured through defined performance metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs) outlined in the contract. This could include trainee performance assessments, feedback surveys, and achievement of specific learning objectives. Regular reviews and validation by the contracting officer's representative are crucial to ensure the training meets its intended goals.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W58RGZ09R0495

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: ROUTE 291 & STEWART AVE, RIDLEY PARK, PA, 19078

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: $67,352,110

Exercised Options: $45,499,793

Current Obligation: $45,499,793

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline