Department of Defense awards $14.8M contract for equipment supply, design, and testing services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,838,802 ($14.8M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-07-20

End Date: 2008-05-18

Contract Duration: 668 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: {PIIN: W91GXY06C0069} SUPPLY, DESIGN AND TESTING OF EQUIPMENT, CONSTRUCT

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: {PIIN: W91GXY06C0069} SUPPLY, DESIGN AND TESTING OF EQUIPMENT, CONSTRUCT Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a broad market search. 2. The contract duration of 668 days indicates a medium-term project. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government. 4. The awardee is listed as 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES', requiring further clarity on specific entities. 5. The NAICS code 541611 points to administrative and general management consulting services. 6. This contract falls under the Department of the Army's procurement activities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $14.8 million for a 668-day contract for supply, design, and testing of equipment appears within a reasonable range for such services. However, without specific details on the equipment and the scope of design and testing, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar contracts for specialized equipment supply and testing would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation of pricing and value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The number of bidders is not specified, but this procurement method generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. The open competition suggests the agency sought the best available solution from the widest possible market.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for competitive pricing and ensures that the government receives the best value by considering a broad range of offerors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely entities within the Department of Defense requiring specialized equipment for supply, design, and testing. Services delivered include the provision of equipment, its design, and rigorous testing protocols. The geographic impact is not specified but is likely tied to military operations or research facilities. Workforce implications could involve specialized engineers, technicians, and supply chain personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' makes it difficult to assess contractor experience and past performance.
The scope of 'supply, design and testing of equipment' is broad and may encompass significant technical complexity.
The contract's end date has passed, making performance assessment retrospective and potentially more challenging.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a commitment to seeking competitive solutions.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract addresses critical needs for equipment supply, design, and testing within the Department of Defense.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader defense sector, specifically related to the acquisition and management of specialized equipment. The market for such services involves defense contractors capable of handling design, testing, and supply chain logistics for military-grade equipment. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend heavily on the specific type of equipment and the complexity of the design and testing required, but it represents a segment of the defense industrial base focused on materiel readiness and technological development.

Small Business Impact

The contract details do not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting plans. Given the awardee is 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES', it is unlikely that small business concerns were a primary focus of this particular award, though subcontracting opportunities could exist depending on the prime contractor's structure.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be enforced through contract clauses, performance reviews, and payment schedules. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases, though specific details of performance and deliverables may be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Materiel Acquisition
Military Equipment Procurement
Research and Development Support Services
Foreign Military Sales Support

Risk Flags

Ambiguity of Awardee Identity
Lack of Specific Scope Definition
Absence of Performance Metrics

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. {PIIN: W91GXY06C0069} SUPPLY, DESIGN AND TESTING OF EQUIPMENT, CONSTRUCT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-07-20. End: 2008-05-18.

What specific types of equipment were supplied, designed, and tested under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact types of equipment involved in contract W91GXY06C0069. The description 'SUPPLY, DESIGN AND TESTING OF EQUIPMENT' is general. To determine the specific equipment, one would need to access the contract's statement of work (SOW) or other detailed documentation. This information is crucial for understanding the technical scope, potential risks, and the relevance of the $14.8 million award value. Without this detail, it's difficult to assess if the contract addressed critical defense needs or involved highly specialized, costly technology.

Who are the 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' and what is their track record?

The designation 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' is highly generic and does not identify the specific foreign entities that received the award. This lack of specificity makes it impossible to assess their individual track records, experience, or past performance with the Department of Defense or other government agencies. Further investigation would be required to identify the actual awardees and research their history, including any previous contracts, performance evaluations, and compliance records. This ambiguity raises questions about due diligence and the ability to hold specific foreign entities accountable for contract performance.

How does the $14.8 million cost compare to similar equipment supply, design, and testing contracts?

A direct comparison of the $14.8 million cost is difficult without knowing the specific nature of the equipment and the scope of services. However, for a contract spanning 668 days (approximately 22 months), this amount suggests a significant undertaking. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify comparable contracts for similar defense equipment, considering factors like technological sophistication, quantity, and the complexity of design and testing phases. The 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' NAICS code (541611) might suggest a focus on the management or consulting aspects of these services rather than pure manufacturing or R&D, which could influence cost expectations.

What were the key performance metrics and outcomes for this contract?

The provided data does not include information on the key performance metrics or specific outcomes achieved under contract W91GXY06C0069. Typically, contracts include a Performance Work Statement (PWS) or SOW outlining deliverables, quality standards, and timelines. Assessing program effectiveness would require reviewing these documents and any associated performance reports, acceptance criteria, and final delivery records. Without this information, it is impossible to determine if the contractor met expectations, if the equipment met requirements, or if the design and testing phases were successful.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar equipment supply, design, and testing services by the Department of the Army?

The provided data is for a single contract (W91GXY06C0069) awarded in 2006. To understand historical spending patterns for similar services, a broader analysis of Department of the Army (and potentially broader DoD) procurements under NAICS code 541611, as well as related codes for equipment manufacturing, testing, and logistics, would be necessary. This would involve examining spending trends over multiple fiscal years, identifying key contractors, and understanding the typical contract values and durations for such services. This single data point does not provide sufficient context for a trend analysis.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: MISCELLANEOUS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Foreign Owned, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,838,802

Exercised Options: $14,838,802

Current Obligation: $14,838,802

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Timeline