DoD awards $20.9M firm-fixed-price contract for training games to BAE Systems

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,944,138 ($20.9M)

Contractor: BAE Systems Onearc USA, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-06-21

End Date: 2026-06-20

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: THIS IS A NEW CONTRACT AWARD FOR GAMES FOR TRAINING.

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, ORANGE County, FLORIDA, 32826

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.9 million to BAE SYSTEMS ONEARC USA, INC. for work described as: THIS IS A NEW CONTRACT AWARD FOR GAMES FOR TRAINING. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for software publishing services related to training games. 2. The contract has a duration of 1460 days, ending in June 2026. 3. This is a definitive contract with a firm-fixed-price payment structure. 4. The contract was not competed, raising questions about price discovery. 5. The awardee, BAE Systems, is a major defense contractor. 6. The contract is for software publishers (NAICS 511210). 7. The contract is being performed in Florida.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $20.9 million for training games is substantial. Without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to benchmark the value for money. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests that the government has a clear understanding of the scope, but the lack of competition prevents a direct comparison to market rates or other similar contracts. Further analysis would be needed to determine if this price represents a fair value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This limits the opportunity for multiple vendors to bid, which can drive down prices and encourage innovation. The lack of competition suggests that the Department of Defense may have identified BAE Systems as the only capable source or that there were specific circumstances justifying a non-competitive award. This approach can lead to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bids, there is less assurance that the price reflects the best possible value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel who will use the training games. The services delivered include the development and provision of software for training purposes. The geographic impact is concentrated in Florida, where the contract is being performed. The contract supports BAE Systems' workforce and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated pricing.
Sole-source awards can reduce transparency and accountability.
Reliance on a single contractor may create vendor lock-in.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
BAE Systems is an established contractor with significant experience.
The contract duration allows for long-term planning and development.

Sector Analysis

The software publishing industry (NAICS 511210) is a significant sector within the broader technology market. This contract falls within the defense sector's procurement of specialized software solutions for training and simulation. Comparable spending benchmarks for training software can vary widely based on complexity, customization, and user base. However, a $20.9 million award for a single training game system suggests a high degree of sophistication or a large-scale deployment.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to a large prime contractor like BAE Systems suggests that small businesses are unlikely to be direct beneficiaries of this specific award, though they may participate indirectly through BAE's supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver specific outcomes. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Training Software
Military Simulation and Training
Software Development Contracts
BAE Systems 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 $20.9 million to BAE SYSTEMS ONEARC USA, INC.. THIS IS A NEW CONTRACT AWARD FOR GAMES FOR TRAINING.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BAE SYSTEMS ONEARC USA, 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 $20.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-06-21. End: 2026-06-20.

What is BAE Systems' track record with similar training game contracts for the DoD?

BAE Systems is a major defense contractor with extensive experience in developing complex systems, including simulation and training solutions. While specific details on their 'training games' portfolio are not provided here, they have a history of delivering large-scale software and hardware solutions for military applications. Their track record generally indicates a capacity to handle significant contracts. However, the lack of competition on this specific award means that direct comparisons of their performance on similar sole-source training game contracts are not readily available. Further investigation into past performance reviews and contract closeouts for BAE Systems on related projects would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the $20.9 million value compare to similar training game development contracts?

Benchmarking the $20.9 million value is challenging without knowing the specific scope, complexity, and intended user base of these training games. However, for large-scale, sophisticated simulation and training software, this figure is within a plausible range for a multi-year contract awarded to a major defense contractor. Contracts for less complex or smaller-scale training tools would typically be significantly lower. The absence of a competitive bidding process makes it difficult to ascertain if this price is optimal. Without comparable sole-source awards or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value comparison is not feasible.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for training games?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for training games include potential overpricing due to the lack of competitive pressure, reduced incentive for innovation from the contractor, and a lack of transparency in the procurement process. Taxpayers may not receive the best possible value for their investment. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, where the government becomes dependent on a single provider, making future transitions difficult or costly. Furthermore, without competition, it's harder to independently verify the necessity and cost-effectiveness of the chosen solution.

How effective are training games in improving military readiness compared to traditional methods?

Training games, particularly those incorporating advanced simulation and adaptive learning technologies, can be highly effective in improving military readiness. They offer immersive, interactive environments that allow personnel to practice complex scenarios, develop decision-making skills, and learn procedures in a safe, repeatable setting. Compared to traditional methods like lectures or static simulations, games can increase engagement, retention, and skill transfer. Their effectiveness is often measured by improved performance metrics in training exercises, reduced errors in operational environments, and faster adaptation to new equipment or tactics. The specific effectiveness of this contract's output would depend on the quality of the game design and its alignment with training objectives.

What is the historical spending trend for training software within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending on training software within the Department of the Army has generally trended upwards, reflecting the increasing reliance on technology for modern military training. This includes investments in simulations, virtual reality, augmented reality, and serious games designed to enhance soldier proficiency across various domains. While specific annual figures fluctuate based on budgetary priorities and technological advancements, the overall trajectory indicates a sustained commitment to digital training solutions. This $20.9 million award for training games aligns with this broader trend of investing in advanced, technology-driven training capabilities to prepare forces for complex operational environments.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Software Publishers › Software Publishers

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - STORAGE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W900KK22R0014

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Compagnie DE Developpement DE L'eau S.A.

Address: 3050 TECHNOLOGY PKWY STE 110, ORLANDO, FL, 32826

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Foreign Owned, Foreign-Owned and U.S.-Incorporated Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,778,872

Exercised Options: $20,994,138

Current Obligation: $20,944,138

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline