DoD's $19M R&D Contract for Weapons Research Awarded to Concurrent Technologies Corp

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,719,848 ($23.7M)

Contractor: Concurrent Technologies Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-02-26

End Date: 2009-09-09

Contract Duration: 1,291 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200605!B01502!1700!N00164!CRANE DIVISION NAVAL SURFACE !N0016405D6661 !A!N! !N!0010 ! !20060226!20080226!189737810!189737810!189737810!N!CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPOR!100 CTC DR !JOHNSTOWN !PA!15904!38288!021!42!JOHNSTOWN !CAMBRIA !PENN !+000001000000!N!N!000000000000!AC52!RDTE/WEAPONS-APPLIED RESEARCH !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541710!E! !5!B!S! ! !C!20100926!B! ! !A! !D!N!R!1!001!N!1B!Z!Y!Z! ! !N!Z!N! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! !9700!SL4703!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: JOHNSTOWN, CAMBRIA County, PENNSYLVANIA, 15904, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.7 million to CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP for work described as: 200605!B01502!1700!N00164!CRANE DIVISION NAVAL SURFACE !N0016405D6661 !A!N! !N!0010 ! !20060226!20080226!189737810!189737810!189737810!N!CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPOR!100 CTC DR !JOHNSTOWN !PA!15904!38288!021!42!JOHNSTOWN !CAMB… Key points: 1. The contract, valued at $18,973,781, is for research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences. 2. Awarded to Concurrent Technologies Corp., this contract represents a significant investment in advanced weapons research. 3. The 'NOT COMPETED' status raises questions about the procurement process and potential missed opportunities for other vendors. 4. The sector focus on R&D for defense indicates a strategic priority for the Department of the Navy.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $18,973,781 for R&D services is substantial. Without comparable contracts for similar specialized research, a precise pricing assessment is difficult. However, the lack of competition suggests potential for overpricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a sole-source basis ('NOT COMPETED'). This limits price discovery and competition, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers compared to a fully competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition in awarding this significant R&D contract may result in higher costs for taxpayers, as competitive bidding processes typically drive down prices.

Public Impact

Taxpayers are funding advanced weapons research, potentially impacting national security capabilities. The sole-source award limits transparency and opportunities for other businesses in the R&D sector. Investment in this specific research area could lead to technological advancements with dual-use applications.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing due to sole-source award
Limited transparency in procurement

Positive Signals

Investment in critical R&D for national defense
Supports a specific technology development path

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on weapons-applied research. The $18.97 million award is a significant investment for this niche area, suggesting a high priority for the Department of the Navy.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this contract, as it was awarded on a sole-source basis to a single large corporation. This limits opportunities for small business participation in this specific R&D effort.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this award warrants further oversight to ensure the pricing is fair and reasonable and that the research objectives are being met efficiently. Accountability for the use of taxpayer funds is crucial.

Related Government Programs

Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Navy Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks transparency.
Potential for inflated costs due to lack of competition.
Limited opportunity for small business participation.
Effectiveness of R&D outcomes not detailed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.7 million to CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP. 200605!B01502!1700!N00164!CRANE DIVISION NAVAL SURFACE !N0016405D6661 !A!N! !N!0010 ! !20060226!20080226!189737810!189737810!189737810!N!CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPOR!100 CTC DR !JOHNSTOWN !PA!15904!38288!021!42!JOHNSTOWN !CAMBRIA !PENN !+000001000000!N!N!000000000000!AC52!RDTE/WEAPONS-APPLIED RESEARCH !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541710!E! !5!B!S! ! !C!201

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-02-26. End: 2009-09-09.

What specific technological advancements are expected from this $19 million R&D investment, and how do they align with current defense strategies?

The contract details do not specify the exact technological advancements. However, 'Weapons-Applied Research' suggests a focus on developing or improving offensive or defensive weapon systems. This aligns with the Department of Defense's ongoing efforts to maintain technological superiority and adapt to evolving global threats. Further documentation would be needed to detail the specific research objectives and their strategic relevance.

Given the sole-source award, what mechanisms are in place to ensure the $18.97 million is being spent efficiently and effectively for the intended research?

While sole-source awards can limit competitive pressure, the Department of the Navy likely has internal oversight mechanisms, including contract performance monitoring, milestone reviews, and financial audits, to ensure funds are used appropriately. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) also implies that the contractor's costs are subject to review and that the final profit is fixed, providing some incentive for efficiency. However, transparency regarding these oversight activities is often limited.

Could a competitive bidding process have yielded better value or innovative solutions for this weapons research, and why was it bypassed?

A competitive bidding process typically drives down costs and can foster innovation by exposing the government to a wider range of solutions and expertise. Bypassing competition suggests that either only one source was deemed capable of performing the research, or there were other justifications for a sole-source award, such as urgency or specific proprietary technology. Without further information on the justification for the sole-source award, it's difficult to definitively say if better value was missed, but it is a common concern.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 100 CTC DR, JOHNSTOWN, PA, 15904

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0016405D6661

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline