DoD's $12.8M contract for navigation systems awarded to Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc. without competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,849,460 ($12.8M)

Contractor: Teledyne Flir Defense, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-08-30

End Date: 2009-03-31

Contract Duration: 944 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: HPMF PN 20727-200

Place of Performance

Location: NORTH BILLERICA, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01862

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.8 million to TELEDYNE FLIR DEFENSE, INC. for work described as: HPMF PN 20727-200 Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating a defined scope and cost. 2. The duration of the contract was 944 days, suggesting a medium-term project. 3. The award was made to a single entity, raising questions about the extent of market research conducted. 4. The contract falls under the 'Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing' NAICS code. 5. The value of the contract is relatively modest in the context of large defense procurements. 6. The absence of competition suggests potential limitations in price discovery and value optimization.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $12.8 million contract is challenging without specific details on the systems procured. However, given the firm-fixed-price structure and the duration, the pricing appears to be set upfront. The lack of competition means there's no direct comparison to other offers to assess if the price was optimal. Further analysis would require understanding the specific technological capabilities and market rates for similar navigation systems.

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 among multiple vendors. The Department of Defense likely determined that only Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc. could provide the required specialized navigation systems. This approach bypasses the typical competitive bidding process, which can limit opportunities for other companies to bid and potentially drive down costs through market forces.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can mean taxpayers may not benefit from the cost savings that competition typically generates. It also limits the government's ability to explore a wider range of innovative solutions from the market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its operational units requiring advanced navigation systems. The services delivered include the provision of specialized search, detection, navigation, guidance, aeronautical, and nautical systems and instruments. The geographic impact is likely focused on naval operations and bases where these systems are deployed. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles for installation, maintenance, and operation of the acquired systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Sole-source awards can reduce transparency in the procurement process.
Potential for vendor lock-in if alternative solutions are not explored.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to an established defense contractor suggests a focus on reliability and proven technology.
Specific system requirements may necessitate a specialized provider.

Sector Analysis

The defense sector, particularly the segment focused on navigation and guidance systems, is characterized by high technological barriers to entry and specialized expertise. Companies like Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc. operate in a market where innovation and reliability are paramount. Spending in this area is driven by the need for advanced capabilities to support military operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other contracts for similar sophisticated electronic systems and components within the defense industrial base.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to involve significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses based on the available data. The award to a large, established defense contractor suggests that the primary focus was on specialized capabilities rather than broad market outreach to smaller enterprises. This could limit the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified goods or services at an agreed-upon price. Transparency is 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 Procurement
Navigation Systems
Naval Systems
Electronic Warfare Systems
Aerospace and Defense Manufacturing

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for inflated pricing

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.8 million to TELEDYNE FLIR DEFENSE, INC.. HPMF PN 20727-200

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TELEDYNE FLIR DEFENSE, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-08-30. End: 2009-03-31.

What specific navigation systems were procured under this contract, and what are their intended operational uses?

The contract, HPMF PN 20727-200, awarded to TELEDYNE FLIR DEFENSE, INC. for $12,849,460, falls under the NAICS code 334511 (Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing). While the specific system names are not detailed in the provided data, the NAICS code indicates the procurement of instruments and systems crucial for navigation, guidance, and detection. These could range from advanced GPS receivers and inertial navigation systems to radar and sonar components, or integrated systems for naval vessels and aircraft. Their intended uses are to enhance the precision, safety, and effectiveness of military operations by providing reliable positional data, situational awareness, and target identification in diverse operational environments.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of being competed?

The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis ('NOT COMPETED') because the Department of Defense likely determined that Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc. was the only responsible source capable of providing the required navigation systems. This determination could be based on factors such as unique technical capabilities, proprietary technology, existing system compatibility requirements, or urgent needs where competition would cause unacceptable delays. Without further documentation from the agency justifying the sole-source award (e.g., a Justification and Approval document), the precise reasons remain speculative but typically align with specific, often highly specialized, defense requirements that only one vendor can meet.

How does the $12.8 million contract value compare to similar procurements for navigation systems by the Department of Defense?

The $12.8 million contract value is a moderate sum within the broader context of Department of Defense spending, which often involves multi-billion dollar programs. For specialized navigation systems, this value could represent a significant procurement for a specific set of components or a particular platform upgrade. However, without knowing the exact nature and quantity of the systems acquired, a direct comparison is difficult. Larger contracts might involve full system development, integration across multiple platforms, or sustainment over many years. Smaller contracts could be for individual components or research and development. This $12.8M award suggests a focused acquisition of established or specialized navigation technology.

What is Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in navigation systems?

Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc. has a history of providing various defense-related products and services to the U.S. military. While the provided data focuses on this single $12.8 million contract, the company is known for its expertise in areas such as electro-optical and infrared imaging, sensor technology, and integrated systems, which are often critical components of advanced navigation and targeting systems. Their involvement in defense contracts suggests a level of established capability and familiarity with military requirements. A comprehensive assessment of their track record would involve reviewing their performance on other contracts, including delivery timeliness, quality of products, and adherence to specifications, particularly in the realm of navigation and guidance technologies.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for navigation systems?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for navigation systems include potentially higher costs due to the lack of competitive pressure, which can lead to suboptimal value for taxpayer money. There's also a risk of reduced innovation, as the government doesn't benefit from the diverse solutions that multiple bidders might offer. Vendor lock-in is another concern; the government may become overly reliant on a single supplier, making it difficult or costly to switch to alternative technologies or providers in the future. Furthermore, without competition, there's less market validation of the chosen technology's performance and price, potentially masking inefficiencies or less-than-optimal solutions.

How does the firm-fixed-price contract type influence the risk and value proposition for this navigation system procurement?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type, like the one used here, shifts most of the risk to the contractor, Teledyne FLIR Defense, Inc. The government agrees to pay a set price regardless of the contractor's actual costs incurred. This provides the Department of the Navy with cost certainty, making budgeting more predictable. For value, FFP contracts incentivize the contractor to control costs efficiently to maximize profit. However, the value realized is highly dependent on the accuracy of the initial cost estimates and the thoroughness of the pre-award negotiation. If the initial price was set too high due to lack of competition or incomplete information, the government may overpay, even with an FFP structure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Teledyne Flir, LLC (UEI: 091296244)

Address: 25 ESQUIRE RD, NORTH BILLERIC, MA

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,849,460

Exercised Options: $12,849,460

Current Obligation: $12,849,460

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0016404D8528

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline