Raytheon Company awarded $88.4M contract for miscellaneous schools and instruction services by the Department of the Army

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $88,401,485 ($88.4M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-12-18

End Date: 2016-02-17

Contract Duration: 61 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.4M/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: LAWTON, COMANCHE County, OKLAHOMA, 73501

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $88.4 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. The contract value of $88.4 million represents a significant investment in educational and instructional services. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract were limited, potentially impacting price discovery and value for money. 3. The contract duration of 61 days suggests a focused, short-term requirement. 4. The firm fixed-price contract type indicates that the price was set in advance, shifting cost risk to the contractor. 5. The absence of specific product or service codes (PSC) makes direct benchmarking challenging. 6. The contract was awarded to a single, large defense contractor, Raytheon Company.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $88.4 million contract is difficult without more specific details on the 'All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction' services provided. The short duration (61 days) suggests a high daily burn rate, which warrants scrutiny. Comparing it to similar, narrowly defined instructional contracts would be necessary to assess if the pricing is competitive. Given the limited competition, it's harder to ascertain if taxpayers received the best possible value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not competed openly, indicated by 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'. This suggests that the Department of the Army likely engaged in a sole-source or limited competition procurement. The lack of broad competition raises questions about whether alternative providers were considered and if the pricing reflects the best available market rates. A limited competition can sometimes be justified for specialized services, but it typically leads to higher prices compared to full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition means taxpayers may have paid a premium, as the government had fewer options to negotiate the best price. This procurement approach reduces the pressure on contractors to offer competitive rates.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel or specific groups requiring specialized instruction. The services delivered fall under 'All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction', indicating a broad category of educational support. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the Army installation where the instruction is provided. Workforce implications could include the deployment of specialized instructors and support staff for the duration of the contract.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may have resulted in a higher cost to taxpayers.
Lack of detailed service description hinders performance evaluation.
Short contract duration could indicate a rushed or emergency requirement, potentially leading to inflated costs.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to a large, established contractor like Raytheon may indicate a reliance on proven capabilities.
The contract addresses a specific instructional need within the Department of the Army.

Sector Analysis

The 'All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction' category falls within the broader education and training services sector. This sector is crucial for government operations, particularly for defense and public service agencies requiring specialized skills development. The market for such services can range from highly specialized technical training to general educational support. Benchmarking spending in this area is challenging due to the diverse nature of 'miscellaneous' services, but significant government investment is typical for maintaining a skilled workforce.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides. The award to Raytheon Company, a large prime contractor, suggests that small businesses were likely not primary recipients of this prime contract funding. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist but are not explicitly detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The Inspector General's office may also conduct audits or investigations if performance issues or financial irregularities arise. Transparency is limited by the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status, making public oversight more challenging.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Training and Education Contracts
Federal Education Services Contracts
Military Branch Specific Instruction Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited Competition
Lack of Specific Service Details
High Implied Daily Cost

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $88.4 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON 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 $88.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-12-18. End: 2016-02-17.

What specific instructional services were provided under this contract?

The provided data classifies the service under NAICS code 611699, 'All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction.' This is a broad category that could encompass a wide range of educational activities, such as vocational training, specialized skill development, tutoring, or preparatory courses. Without further details from the contract's statement of work or performance reports, it is impossible to determine the exact nature of the instruction. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to assess the relevance and effectiveness of the services rendered and to compare them against industry standards or other government training programs.

How does the $88.4 million cost compare to similar instructional contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

Direct comparison of the $88.4 million cost is challenging due to the broad classification of 'All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction' and the limited competition. To provide a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify contracts with similar durations (61 days) and scope of services, ideally competed under similar conditions. However, given the short duration, the implied daily cost is extremely high (approximately $1.45 million per day). This figure suggests either highly specialized, intensive training or potentially an inflated price due to the lack of competitive bidding. A thorough analysis would require access to a database of comparable contracts with detailed service descriptions and pricing structures.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the success of this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, for instructional services, KPIs might include student completion rates, post-training performance assessments, instructor qualifications, adherence to curriculum, and student satisfaction surveys. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor is responsible for delivering the agreed-upon services within the set budget. However, without defined metrics and reporting requirements within the contract documents, assessing the contractor's performance and the overall success of the training program from a public perspective is not feasible.

What is Raytheon Company's track record in providing 'miscellaneous schools and instruction' services to the federal government?

Raytheon Company is a major defense contractor known primarily for its work in aerospace, defense, and security systems. While they possess significant expertise in technology and complex project management, their direct experience in providing 'miscellaneous schools and instruction' services, as defined by NAICS 611699, may be less prominent compared to their core competencies. Their involvement in this specific contract suggests they may have capabilities in specialized training related to their technological offerings or have acquired companies with such expertise. A deeper dive into their contract history would be needed to ascertain the extent and success of their past performance in this particular service area.

What are the risks associated with a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' contract of this magnitude?

The primary risk associated with a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' contract of $88.4 million is the potential for overpayment and reduced value for taxpayers. Without competitive bidding, the government loses the leverage to negotiate the best possible price and terms. This can lead to inflated costs, as the contractor faces less pressure to be efficient or innovative. Additionally, it raises concerns about whether the chosen contractor is truly the best source for the required services, potentially limiting access to more capable or cost-effective providers. Transparency is also reduced, making it harder for the public and oversight bodies to scrutinize the procurement process and outcomes.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational Services › Other Schools and Instruction › All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction

Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W9124716R0002

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Rockwell Collins Australia PTY Limited

Address: 350 LOWELL ST, ANDOVER, MA, 01810

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: $88,401,485

Exercised Options: $88,401,485

Current Obligation: $88,401,485

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 56

Total Subaward Amount: $4,762,867

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline