Naval Air Warfare Center Training contract awarded to NLX Corporation for $32.78M for operational training devices

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $32,783,173 ($32.8M)

Contractor: Rockwell Collins Simulation & Training Solutions LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-09-23

End Date: 2011-08-26

Contract Duration: 2,894 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200312!000267!1700!A8302 !NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER TRAININ!N6133901D0722 !A!N! !N!0005 !20030923!20030630!809238447!809238447!809238447!N!NLX CORPORATION !22626 SALLY RIDE DRIVE !STERLING !VA!20164!06607!007!36!BINGHAMTON !BROOME !NEW YORK !+000013277678!N!N!000000000000!6930!OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME!2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541990!A!A!5!B!M! !A!D!20040630!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!001!A! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: CEDAR RAPIDS, LINN County, IOWA, 52498

State: Iowa Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $32.8 million to ROCKWELL COLLINS SIMULATION & TRAINING SOLUTIONS LLC for work described as: 200312!000267!1700!A8302 !NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER TRAININ!N6133901D0722 !A!N! !N!0005 !20030923!20030630!809238447!809238447!809238447!N!NLX CORPORATION !22626 SALLY RIDE DRIVE !STERLING !VA!20164!06607!007!36!BINGHAMTON !BROOM… Key points: 1. Contract value of $32.78M over its period of performance. 2. Awarded under full and open competition. 3. Contract duration of approximately 8 years. 4. Primarily for operational training devices. 5. NAICS code 541990 indicates a broad range of professional, scientific, and technical services. 6. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price, indicating predictable costs for the government.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $32.78M over nearly 8 years suggests a moderate annual spend. Without specific details on the number or type of training devices, a direct value-for-money assessment is difficult. However, the firm fixed-price nature provides cost certainty. Benchmarking against similar contracts for operational training devices would be necessary for a more precise 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, suggesting that multiple bidders had the opportunity to compete. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The government likely received proposals from various qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible pricing through a competitive bidding process.

Public Impact

Naval personnel will benefit from enhanced operational training capabilities. Services delivered include the provision of operational training devices. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around naval training facilities. Workforce implications may include roles in the development, manufacturing, and maintenance of training devices.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically related to defense training and simulation. The market for operational training devices is significant within the defense industry, encompassing a range of technologies from basic simulators to complex virtual reality systems. Spending in this area is driven by the need for realistic and cost-effective training solutions for military personnel.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not explicitly detailed in the provided data. As this was a full and open competition, the primary award went to NLX Corporation. Further investigation would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved in the subcontracting chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability for the contractor to deliver within the agreed-upon price. Transparency would depend on the public availability of contract performance reports and any associated Inspector General reviews.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, naval-air-warfare-center-training, firm-fixed-price, operational-training-devices, full-and-open-competition, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, naics-541990, nlx-corporation, va, long-term-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $32.8 million to ROCKWELL COLLINS SIMULATION & TRAINING SOLUTIONS LLC. 200312!000267!1700!A8302 !NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER TRAININ!N6133901D0722 !A!N! !N!0005 !20030923!20030630!809238447!809238447!809238447!N!NLX CORPORATION !22626 SALLY RIDE DRIVE !STERLING !VA!20164!06607!007!36!BINGHAMTON !BROOME !NEW YORK !+000013277678!N!N!000000000000!6930!OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME!2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !541990!A!A!5!B!M! !A!D!20040630!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ROCKWELL COLLINS SIMULATION & TRAINING SOLUTIONS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $32.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-23. End: 2011-08-26.

What specific types of operational training devices were procured under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES' under NAICS code 541990 (All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services). However, the specific types of devices are not detailed. This could range from flight simulators and virtual reality training systems to maintenance trainers or tactical scenario simulators. Understanding the exact nature of these devices is crucial for assessing their technological relevance, cost, and impact on training effectiveness.

How does the contract value of $32.78M compare to similar procurements for operational training devices?

A direct comparison of the $32.78M contract value is challenging without knowing the specifics of the devices procured and the contract duration. However, the contract spanned from September 2003 to August 2011 (approximately 8 years), making the average annual value around $4.1M. This figure needs to be benchmarked against the cost of comparable training systems, considering factors like complexity, technology, and the number of units acquired. Without more granular data on the scope of work and market rates for similar systems, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a competitive price point.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the contractor's performance?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate NLX Corporation's performance under this contract. Typically, for training device contracts, KPIs might include factors such as device reliability (uptime), fidelity of simulation, adherence to delivery schedules, training effectiveness as measured by user feedback or performance improvements, and compliance with technical specifications. The absence of this information limits a thorough assessment of the contractor's track record and the overall success of the delivered training solutions.

What is the historical spending trend for operational training devices by the Naval Air Warfare Center?

The provided data represents a single contract award from 2003 to 2011. To understand historical spending trends for operational training devices by the Naval Air Warfare Center, a broader analysis of multiple contracts over a longer period would be necessary. This would involve examining annual spending patterns, identifying major contract vehicles, and tracking the evolution of technology and associated costs. This single data point does not provide sufficient context to establish a trend.

Were there any identified risks associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?

The provided data does not explicitly list any identified risks or mitigation strategies for this contract. However, common risks in procuring complex training devices can include technological obsolescence, integration challenges with existing systems, schedule delays, cost overruns (though mitigated by FFP), and contractor performance issues. The firm fixed-price structure inherently shifts some cost risk to the contractor. Further details on risk management would likely be found in the contract's statement of work or associated documentation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesOther Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesAll Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Product/Service Code: TRAINING AIDS AND DEVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Rockwell Collins, Inc. (UEI: 962960589)

Address: 22626 SALLY RIDE DRIVE, STERLING, VA, 10

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6133901D0722

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2003-09-23

Current End Date: 2011-08-26

Potential End Date: 2011-08-26 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2010-08-27

More Contracts from Rockwell Collins Simulation & Training Solutions LLC

View all Rockwell Collins Simulation & Training Solutions LLC federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending