DoD awards $17.8M for aircraft parts, with competition limited after initial exclusion of sources

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,795,375 ($17.8M)

Contractor: Defense Systems and Solutions

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-11-18

End Date: 2026-08-04

Contract Duration: 624 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: TREX T&I.

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35808

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.8 million to DEFENSE SYSTEMS AND SOLUTIONS for work described as: TREX T&I. Key points: 1. Value appears reasonable given the contract type and duration, but detailed cost breakdowns are needed for a definitive assessment. 2. Competition was initially full and open, but later excluded sources, raising questions about the extent of market engagement. 3. The contract's cost-plus-fixed-fee structure carries inherent risk of cost overruns if not closely managed. 4. Performance is tied to aircraft parts manufacturing, a critical but potentially volatile sector. 5. This contract falls within the broader Defense sector, specifically supporting aircraft equipment. 6. The duration of 624 days suggests a significant project requiring sustained effort.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) type, which can lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently. Benchmarking the fixed fee against industry standards for similar services would be necessary for a precise value assessment. Given the limited competition post-exclusion, it's difficult to definitively state if the pricing reflects optimal market value without further cost analysis.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was initially advertised as full and open competition but later had sources excluded. This suggests that while the market was initially broadly solicited, a subsequent decision narrowed the field. The specific reasons for excluding sources are not detailed, which limits the ability to assess the impact on price discovery. The limited pool of bidders post-exclusion may have reduced competitive pressure.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources after initial broad solicitation raises concerns about whether taxpayers received the most competitive pricing possible. A narrower competition can sometimes lead to higher costs than a truly open market.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from the acquisition of essential aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment. Services delivered include the manufacturing and supply of specialized aircraft components. The geographic impact is primarily within Alabama, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications may include skilled labor in manufacturing and aerospace engineering within the contractor's facilities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF contract type.
Limited competition post-exclusion of sources may impact price competitiveness.
Lack of detailed cost breakdowns hinders thorough value-for-money assessment.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a company with Defense Systems and Solutions expertise.
Clear delivery and performance periods defined.
Contract supports critical defense needs for aircraft parts.

Sector Analysis

This contract operates within the aerospace and defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment. This industry is characterized by high technological demands, stringent quality control, and significant government procurement. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other DoD contracts for similar aircraft components, considering factors like complexity, volume, and material costs.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (SB set-aside) was not a factor in this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from this specific award. The focus appears to be on larger-scale defense contracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are embedded in the CPFF structure, requiring detailed cost reporting and justification. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance metrics and detailed cost breakdowns may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Parts Manufacturing
Defense Procurement
Aerospace Components
Department of the Army Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition post-exclusion
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type carries inherent cost risk
Lack of detailed public cost breakdowns

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.8 million to DEFENSE SYSTEMS AND SOLUTIONS. TREX T&I.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DEFENSE SYSTEMS AND SOLUTIONS.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $17.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-11-18. End: 2026-08-04.

What is the contractor's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly on similar Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts?

Assessing the contractor's (DEFENSE SYSTEMS AND SOLUTIONS) track record with the Department of Defense requires a review of their past performance history. Specific data on their success rate, adherence to budget, and quality of delivery on previous CPFF contracts would be crucial. Without access to a detailed performance database or past performance reviews, it's difficult to ascertain their reliability. However, the award of this contract suggests they met minimum qualification standards. Further investigation into contract close-out data and any reported disputes or terminations would provide a more comprehensive picture of their DoD engagement.

How does the fixed fee component of this CPFF contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar aircraft parts manufacturing?

The fixed fee is a critical component of this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract. To benchmark this fee, one would need to compare it against industry standards for similar aircraft parts manufacturing services. This involves analyzing the complexity of the parts, the required technological expertise, the volume of production, and the associated risks. A typical fixed fee might range from 5% to 15% of the estimated cost, depending on these factors. Without specific details on the estimated cost and the negotiated fixed fee percentage, a direct comparison is challenging. However, a fee significantly outside this range could indicate either exceptional value or potential overpricing.

What specific factors led to the exclusion of sources after the initial 'full and open competition' announcement?

The exclusion of sources after an initial 'full and open competition' announcement typically arises from specific circumstances outlined in federal acquisition regulations. Common reasons include the need for specialized capabilities, proprietary technology, or urgent requirements that only a limited number of contractors can meet. It could also stem from a re-evaluation of proposals or a determination that only certain offerors possessed the necessary qualifications or security clearances. Without explicit documentation detailing the rationale behind the source exclusion for this specific contract, it remains speculative. Understanding this reason is key to assessing whether the competition was appropriately narrowed or unduly restricted.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how will performance be measured against the $17.8 million award?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract would likely revolve around the timely delivery of specified aircraft parts, adherence to quality standards (e.g., defect rates, compliance with aerospace certifications), and potentially cost control within the CPFF framework. Performance measurement against the $17.8 million award would involve tracking expenditures against the estimated cost base and ensuring the fixed fee is earned through satisfactory performance. The contract's Statement of Work (SOW) would detail these KPIs and the methods for monitoring progress. Regular progress reports from the contractor and government oversight are essential for tracking performance and ensuring the value of the award is realized.

How does this $17.8 million award compare to historical spending patterns for similar aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment by the Department of the Army?

Comparing this $17.8 million award to historical spending patterns requires access to historical contract databases for the Department of the Army (DoA). Analyzing past awards for similar 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' (NAICS 336413) over recent fiscal years would provide context. Key metrics for comparison include the total dollar value of similar contracts, the number of bidders, the contract types (e.g., fixed-price vs. cost-reimbursement), and the duration. If this award is significantly higher or lower than historical averages for comparable procurements, it warrants further investigation into the specific requirements, market conditions, and potential changes in technology or material costs.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 631 DISCOVERY DR, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35806

Business Categories: Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, SBA Certified 8 a Joint Venture, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,795,375

Exercised Options: $17,795,375

Current Obligation: $17,795,375

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 9

Total Subaward Amount: $6,244,124

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W58RGZ18D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline