DoD's $34.7M contract for communication equipment repair awarded to General Dynamics Mission Systems

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,700,000 ($34.7M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Mission Systems, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-02-19

End Date: 2019-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,411 days

Daily Burn Rate: $24.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW ON LOGISTICS SUPPORT FOR FY 2016 - 2019 FMS CASE: TW-B-ZAR&TW-B-ZBP

Place of Performance

Location: TAUNTON, BRISTOL County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02780

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.7 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS MISSION SYSTEMS, INC. for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW ON LOGISTICS SUPPORT FOR FY 2016 - 2019 FMS CASE: TW-B-ZAR&TW-B-ZBP Key points: 1. Contract awarded for logistics support of FMS cases, indicating a focus on sustainment. 2. The contract duration of 1411 days suggests a long-term need for these services. 3. Awarded as a definitive contract, implying a clear scope of work. 4. The fixed-price nature of the contract shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 811213 points to a specialized repair service. 6. The contract was not competitively procured, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without comparable data for similar Foreign Military Sales (FMS) logistics support. The raw dollar amount of $34.7 million over approximately 3.8 years suggests a significant investment in maintaining communication equipment. However, the lack of competition makes it difficult to assess if the pricing reflects fair market value or if taxpayers received the best possible price. Further analysis would require understanding the specific equipment supported and the complexity of the repair and logistics services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a sole-source justification, meaning it was not open to full and open competition. This typically occurs when only one responsible source is available or when there is a compelling urgency. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to drive down costs and potentially limits the range of innovative solutions that could have been brought forward by multiple bidders.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is less pressure on the contractor to offer competitive pricing. This limits the government's ability to achieve cost savings through a competitive bidding process.

Public Impact

Foreign military sales partners benefit from the continued operational readiness of their communication equipment. The contract ensures the availability of repair and maintenance services for critical communication systems. The geographic impact is likely global, supporting FMS cases in various regions. The contract supports a specialized workforce skilled in communication equipment repair and logistics.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may result in higher costs for taxpayers.
Limited transparency into the justification for sole-source award.
Potential for contractor lock-in due to specialized nature of services.

Positive Signals

Ensures continued operational readiness for supported FMS cases.
Definitive contract structure provides clarity on scope and deliverables.
Fixed-price contract shifts financial risk to the contractor.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically focusing on the sustainment and maintenance of communication equipment for foreign military sales. The market for defense logistics and repair services is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to ensuring the readiness of military assets. This contract represents a portion of that spending, aimed at supporting specific international security cooperation efforts. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other sustainment contracts for communication systems or broader logistics support agreements within the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a large defense contractor, it is unlikely to have directly benefited small businesses through prime contract opportunities. The impact on the small business ecosystem would be minimal unless General Dynamics Mission Systems engaged small businesses as subcontractors, which is not specified.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature of the award, with details on the justification for the award not readily available in the provided data. Accountability would be managed through contract performance monitoring and adherence to the firm-fixed-price terms.

Related Government Programs

Foreign Military Sales Program
Defense Logistics Agency Support Contracts
Communication Systems Maintenance
Tactical Communication Equipment Sustainment

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing pressure.
Limited public information on justification for sole-source award.
Potential for cost overruns if scope or complexity was underestimated.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical support.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.7 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS MISSION SYSTEMS, INC.. IGF::OT::IGF FOLLOW ON LOGISTICS SUPPORT FOR FY 2016 - 2019 FMS CASE: TW-B-ZAR&TW-B-ZBP

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS MISSION SYSTEMS, 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 $34.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-02-19. End: 2019-12-31.

What specific communication equipment is covered under this contract, and what is the criticality of its function for the FMS cases?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'IGF FOLLOW ON LOGISTICS SUPPORT FOR FY 2016 - 2019 FMS CASE: TW-B-ZAR&TW-B-ZBP'. While the specific communication equipment is not detailed, the FMS case identifiers (TW-B-ZAR and TW-B-ZBP) suggest support for Taiwan's defense needs. The criticality of communication equipment in modern military operations, especially in potentially sensitive geopolitical regions, is exceptionally high. These systems are vital for command and control, intelligence sharing, and operational coordination. Failures or degradation in these systems could significantly impair a partner nation's defense capabilities and interoperability with U.S. forces.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis, and were alternative solutions considered?

The data explicitly states the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which is synonymous with a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not provided in the data. Typically, sole-source awards are justified under circumstances such as the existence of only one responsible source, a compelling urgency, or when the acquisition is for a unique item or service that only one contractor can provide. Without the official justification document, it is impossible to ascertain the precise reasons or whether alternative solutions were evaluated and deemed unsuitable. This lack of transparency is a common concern with sole-source procurements.

How does the awarded amount of $34.7 million compare to historical spending on similar logistics support for FMS communication equipment?

Direct comparison of the $34.7 million award to historical spending on similar Foreign Military Sales (FMS) logistics support for communication equipment is difficult without access to a broader dataset of past FMS contracts and their associated costs. The provided data only includes details for this specific contract. To perform a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify previous contracts for the same or similar FMS cases (TW-B-ZAR, TW-B-ZBP), or contracts for comparable communication equipment sustainment for other FMS partners, and analyze their total value, duration, and scope of services. Such an analysis would help determine if this contract represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of spending for this type of support.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this logistics support contract, and how was contractor performance monitored?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or the methods used for monitoring contractor performance under this contract. Typically, for logistics support and repair services, KPIs might include metrics such as response time for repair requests, equipment uptime/availability, delivery timelines for parts, quality of repairs, and adherence to maintenance schedules. Performance monitoring would likely involve regular reporting from General Dynamics Mission Systems, joint reviews between the contractor and the Department of the Army, and potentially site visits or audits. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the contractor is responsible for meeting the defined scope and quality standards within the agreed-upon price.

What is the track record of General Dynamics Mission Systems in providing similar logistics and repair services, particularly for FMS clients?

General Dynamics Mission Systems (GDMS) is a well-established defense contractor with a significant track record in providing a wide range of mission-critical systems and services, including communications, command and control, and IT solutions. They have extensive experience supporting U.S. military branches and international allies through Foreign Military Sales (FMS). While specific details on their performance for FMS case TW-B-ZAR and TW-B-ZBP are not in this dataset, GDMS generally has a history of delivering complex systems and sustainment services. Their experience suggests a capability to handle the technical demands of communication equipment repair and logistics. However, as with any large contractor, performance can vary across contracts, and a deeper dive into past performance reviews and contract awards would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance › Communication Equipment Repair and Maintenance

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W91CRB16R5009

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp (UEI: 001381284)

Address: 400 JOHN QUINCY ADAMS RD, TAUNTON, MA, 02780

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: $34,700,000

Exercised Options: $34,700,000

Current Obligation: $34,700,000

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 14

Total Subaward Amount: $23,116,112

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline