Department of the Army awards $26.9M contract for aircraft parts to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,889,705 ($26.9M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-03-05

End Date: 2026-07-24

Contract Duration: 506 days

Daily Burn Rate: $53.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: UES II KITS (P/N 70070-95213-013)

Place of Performance

Location: STRATFORD, FAIRFIELD County, CONNECTICUT, 06614

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.9 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION for work described as: UES II KITS (P/N 70070-95213-013) Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential price overruns. 2. The contract duration of 506 days suggests a need for ongoing supply chain support. 3. Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, a major defense contractor, has a significant track record. 4. The specific parts (UES II KITS) are critical for aircraft maintenance and readiness. 5. The contract's value is substantial, indicating a significant procurement for the Army. 6. Lack of competition limits opportunities for other suppliers and potentially higher prices.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar sole-source procurements for specialized aircraft kits. The firm-fixed-price structure offers some cost certainty, but the absence of competition means the Army may not be achieving the best possible price. Further analysis of historical pricing for these specific kits or comparable components would be needed to definitively assess value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one bidder, Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, was solicited. This approach is typically used when a unique product or service is required, or when only one responsible source is available. The lack of competition means the Army did not benefit from a bidding process that could have driven down prices through market forces.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without alternative quotes, it's difficult to ascertain if the price reflects true market value or if it includes a higher profit margin for the sole-source provider.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, ensuring the availability of critical aircraft parts for operational readiness. The contract delivers essential components (UES II KITS) for aircraft maintenance and repair. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting Army aviation operations. The contract supports the workforce at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation and its supply chain partners.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers.
Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification process.
Dependence on a single supplier for critical aircraft components can create supply chain risks.
Potential for cost creep if contract terms are not rigorously managed.
Limited visibility into the contractor's cost structure due to sole-source nature.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the awarded amount.
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation is a reputable and experienced defense contractor.
Contract ensures timely delivery of critical aircraft parts, supporting military readiness.
The contract duration is defined, providing a clear timeframe for delivery.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high barriers to entry, complex supply chains, and significant government procurement. Contracts for specialized aircraft parts, like the UES II KITS, fall within the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' sub-sector. This market often involves proprietary technology and long-standing relationships between manufacturers and defense agencies. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining aging fleets and ensuring technological superiority, but sole-source awards can represent a significant portion of the overall procurement budget due to specialized requirements.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses mentioned in the provided data. As a sole-source award to a large corporation, it is unlikely to directly benefit the small business ecosystem unless Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation voluntarily engages small business subcontractors. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine any indirect impact.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which caps the government's liability. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Department of the Army Aircraft Maintenance Contracts
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Support Contracts
UES II KITS Procurement
Other Aircraft Parts Manufacturing Contracts
Sole-Source Defense Procurements

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competitive bidding
Potential for price overruns
Dependence on single supplier

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.9 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION. UES II KITS (P/N 70070-95213-013)

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 $26.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-03-05. End: 2026-07-24.

What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded as 'NOT COMPETED,' which is synonymous with a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not detailed in the data. Typically, sole-source awards are justified under circumstances such as the existence of only one responsible source, urgent and compelling needs, or when the procurement is for a unique item or service for which only one vendor can provide. Without further documentation from the Department of the Army, the precise rationale remains unknown. This lack of competition raises concerns about whether the government explored all available options to ensure fair and competitive pricing.

How does the price of these UES II KITS compare to similar components or historical pricing for this specific item?

The provided data includes the total contract value ($26,889,704.58) but does not offer a per-unit cost for the UES II KITS (P/N 70070-95213-013) or any historical pricing data. Therefore, a direct comparison to similar components or historical pricing is not possible with the information given. Benchmarking the value would require access to detailed cost breakdowns, unit prices, or previous contract awards for the same or comparable kits. The absence of this information, especially in a sole-source context, makes it difficult to assess if the price paid represents good value for money.

What are the potential risks associated with relying on a single supplier, Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, for these critical aircraft parts?

Relying on a single supplier like Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation for critical aircraft parts presents several risks. Firstly, there's a risk of supply chain disruption; if Sikorsky faces production issues, labor strikes, or other operational challenges, the Army's supply of these essential kits could be jeopardized, impacting aircraft readiness. Secondly, the lack of competition inherent in a sole-source award can lead to higher prices over time, as the supplier faces no market pressure to reduce costs. Thirdly, there's a potential for reduced innovation, as the sole supplier may have less incentive to invest in improving the product or manufacturing process. Finally, long-term dependence on one supplier can reduce the government's leverage in future negotiations.

What is the expected performance period and delivery schedule for this contract, and how does it align with the Army's operational needs?

The contract has a specified start date of March 5, 2025, and an end date of July 24, 2026, resulting in a performance duration of approximately 506 days. This timeframe suggests a need for a consistent supply of UES II KITS over this period. The alignment with the Army's operational needs depends on the specific aircraft platforms these kits support and their projected operational tempo and maintenance schedules. Without knowing which aircraft are involved and their operational tempo, it's difficult to definitively assess alignment. However, a contract duration of over a year indicates a sustained requirement rather than an immediate, short-term need.

What is the total historical spending by the Department of the Army on UES II KITS or similar aircraft parts from Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation?

The provided data only pertains to this specific contract award of $26,889,704.58 for UES II KITS (P/N 70070-95213-013). It does not contain information on the Department of the Army's total historical spending on these specific kits or similar aircraft parts from Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation. To determine historical spending patterns, a broader search of federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) would be necessary, looking for all contracts awarded to Sikorsky for these or related part numbers across all Army programs and fiscal years. This would provide context on the scale and frequency of such procurements.

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: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 06614

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: $26,889,705

Exercised Options: $26,889,705

Current Obligation: $26,889,705

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W58RGZ25D0017

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline