DoD's $48M FSR Support contract to General Dynamics shows strong competition and fair pricing

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $48,164,863 ($48.2M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Land Systems - Force Protection Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-03-10

End Date: 2012-09-30

Contract Duration: 935 days

Daily Burn Rate: $51.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: OPTION YEAR 3 FSR SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: LADSON, CHARLESTON County, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29456

State: South Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $48.2 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC. for work described as: OPTION YEAR 3 FSR SUPPORT Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the firm-fixed-price structure and competitive award. 2. Strong competition was present, with 10 bidders vying for this contract. 3. Risk indicators are low due to the firm-fixed-price contract type and established contractor. 4. Performance context is within the defense sector, supporting armored vehicle maintenance. 5. Sector positioning is within military vehicle manufacturing and support services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's firm-fixed-price nature suggests a commitment to cost control. Benchmarking against similar support contracts for armored vehicles would provide a clearer picture of value, but the competitive award process implies pricing was scrutinized. The total award value of approximately $48 million over its period of performance indicates a significant investment in maintaining critical defense assets.

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 offers. The presence of 10 bidders suggests a robust and healthy competitive environment for this type of defense support service. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The high number of bidders means taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently, as competition drove down prices. This also suggests a broad market capable of providing these specialized services, preventing reliance on a single provider.

Public Impact

Benefits the Department of Defense by ensuring the operational readiness of armored vehicles. Delivers essential field service representative (FSR) support, including technical assistance and maintenance. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around military bases and operational theaters where these vehicles are deployed. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled technicians and support personnel by the contractor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly, given the nature of support services.
Dependence on contractor expertise could pose a risk if key personnel depart.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type helps control costs.
Full and open competition indicates a healthy market and competitive pricing.
Established contractor with experience in defense systems.

Sector Analysis

The defense sector for military vehicle manufacturing and support is a substantial market driven by government procurement. This contract fits within the broader category of sustainment and logistics services, crucial for maintaining the operational effectiveness of military equipment. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other contracts for FSRs or maintenance services for similar vehicle platforms within the DoD.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, and the prime contractor is a large entity. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this award. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether General Dynamics utilizes small businesses for any part of the support services, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight is likely managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for contract administration. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, performance metrics, and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance data may be restricted.

Related Government Programs

Armored Vehicle Maintenance Contracts
Field Service Representative Services
Department of Defense Logistics Support
Military Vehicle Sustainment Programs

Risk Flags

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price
Competition Level: Full and Open
Contract Value: Significant ($48M+)
Contractor: Established Defense Contractor

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $48.2 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC.. OPTION YEAR 3 FSR SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $48.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-03-10. End: 2012-09-30.

What is the track record of General Dynamics Land Systems - Force Protection Inc. in providing similar field service support?

General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) has a long-standing and extensive track record in supporting military vehicles, including armored platforms. Their role often extends beyond manufacturing to include comprehensive lifecycle support, which encompasses field service, maintenance, repair, and training. Force Protection Inc., now part of GDLS, also has a history with specialized protected vehicles. This specific contract likely leverages their established expertise in providing technical assistance, troubleshooting, and on-site support to ensure the operational readiness of the vehicles they produce or maintain. Their experience suggests a deep understanding of the technical requirements and operational demands associated with military armored vehicles, making them a capable provider for such services.

How does the per-unit cost of this contract compare to similar FSR support contracts for armored vehicles?

Directly comparing the per-unit cost for Field Service Representative (FSR) support is challenging without specific details on the number of representatives, their skill levels, geographic locations, and the exact scope of services provided per unit. The total award of approximately $48 million over roughly two years (from the delivery order date to the end date) suggests a substantial investment. However, 'per-unit cost' could refer to the cost per vehicle supported or per hour of service. Given the firm-fixed-price nature and the competitive award with 10 bidders, it is reasonable to infer that the pricing was considered fair and competitive at the time of award. A more precise benchmark would require access to detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons with other contracts for similar FSR services on comparable vehicle platforms within the DoD.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they mitigated?

Primary risks associated with this Field Service Representative (FSR) support contract include potential cost overruns if the scope of work expands beyond initial estimates (though mitigated by the firm-fixed-price structure), contractor performance issues impacting vehicle readiness, and the potential loss of critical contractor personnel with specialized knowledge. Mitigation strategies likely include robust contract oversight by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), clear performance metrics and deliverables outlined in the contract, and requirements for contractor reporting. The firm-fixed-price contract itself is a key risk mitigation tool for the government, placing the cost risk on the contractor. Furthermore, the competitive award process suggests a selection of a contractor deemed capable of meeting performance expectations.

How effective is this contract in ensuring the operational readiness of the supported armored vehicles?

The effectiveness of this contract in ensuring operational readiness is primarily measured by the contractor's ability to provide timely and competent technical support, maintenance, and troubleshooting for the armored vehicles. The fact that it was awarded under full and open competition with 10 bidders suggests that the DoD selected a capable provider. The firm-fixed-price structure incentivizes the contractor to perform efficiently. However, true effectiveness hinges on the specific performance metrics defined in the contract, the quality of the FSRs deployed, and the responsiveness to maintenance needs in the field. Without access to performance reports or readiness statistics directly linked to this contract, a definitive assessment of effectiveness is limited, but the competitive award and contract type provide a foundation for expected performance.

What are the historical spending patterns for Field Service Representative support within the Department of Defense for armored vehicles?

Historical spending patterns for Field Service Representative (FSR) support within the Department of Defense for armored vehicles are substantial and ongoing, reflecting the military's reliance on maintaining a high level of operational readiness for its complex equipment. Such contracts are typically awarded over multiple years, often with options for extension, due to the long service life of armored platforms. Spending fluctuates based on modernization programs, operational tempo, and budget allocations. Contracts like this one, valued in the tens of millions, are common for major vehicle platforms. The DoD consistently allocates significant portions of its budget to sustainment, maintenance, and support services, including FSRs, to ensure that its ground vehicle fleet remains effective across various operational environments.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing › Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MOTOR VEHICLES, CYCLES, TRAILERS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: M6785407R5000

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp (UEI: 001381284)

Address: 9801 HIGHWAY 78 # 3, LADSON, SC, 29456

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $48,164,863

Exercised Options: $48,164,863

Current Obligation: $48,164,863

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: M6785407D5031

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline