DoD's $15.7M contract for simulation support awarded to Cubic Global Defense, Inc. under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,729,099 ($15.7M)

Contractor: Cubic Global Defense, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-29

End Date: 2007-10-17

Contract Duration: 383 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: GENERAL SUPPORT FOR NSC SIMULATIONS

Place of Performance

Location: FORT LEAVENWORTH, LEAVENWORTH County, KANSAS, 66027

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.7 million to CUBIC GLOBAL DEFENSE, INC. for work described as: GENERAL SUPPORT FOR NSC SIMULATIONS Key points: 1. Contract awarded for administrative management and general management consulting services. 2. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests clear scope and predictable costs. 3. Contract duration of 383 days indicates a medium-term engagement. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Army, indicating a focus on military operational needs. 5. The contract was competed fully and openly, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized, potentially limiting small business participation. 7. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to management consulting services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar simulation support contracts. The firm fixed price structure is generally favorable for cost control. However, the raw dollar amount of $15.7 million for a little over a year of service requires further analysis to determine if it represents a competitive market rate for the specific simulation support provided.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bidders suggests a degree of competition, but the exact number of bids received and their relative pricing would be needed to fully assess the competitive landscape and its impact on price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to lower prices and better value for government services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Army and its personnel who will receive enhanced simulation capabilities. Services delivered include administrative management and general management consulting, specifically tailored for simulation support. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the Department of the Army's operational areas, potentially globally. Workforce implications may include the need for specialized personnel to manage and operate simulation systems, both within the government and potentially at the contractor's site.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically management consulting. The defense industry heavily utilizes simulation technologies for training, research, and development. Spending in this area is significant, driven by the need for advanced military readiness and technological superiority. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other simulation and training contracts awarded to large defense contractors.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business, and opportunities for small businesses may be limited unless they are direct subcontractors to Cubic Global Defense, Inc. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms would typically involve contract officers, program managers, and potentially inspectors general within the Department of the Army. Transparency is dependent on the public availability of contract performance reports and financial data, which may be limited for national security reasons. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed price contract type, linking payment to successful delivery of services.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-the-army, simulation-support, management-consulting, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, cubic-global-defense, administrative-management, general-management, 2006-contract, medium-value, us-federal-spending

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.7 million to CUBIC GLOBAL DEFENSE, INC.. GENERAL SUPPORT FOR NSC SIMULATIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CUBIC GLOBAL DEFENSE, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-29. End: 2007-10-17.

What specific simulation capabilities or services did Cubic Global Defense, Inc. provide under this contract?

The contract data indicates 'GENERAL SUPPORT FOR NSC SIMULATIONS' and falls under NAICS code 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services). While specific details are not provided in the summary data, this suggests the contractor likely provided services related to the management, operation, maintenance, or enhancement of simulation systems used by the National Simulation Center (NSC) or similar entities within the Department of the Army. This could encompass a range of activities from logistical support and system administration to consulting on simulation design, integration, or utilization for training, analysis, or wargaming purposes. The firm fixed price nature implies a defined scope of work for these support activities.

How does the $15.7 million contract value compare to other similar simulation support contracts awarded by the DoD?

Directly comparing the $15.7 million value requires access to a database of similar contracts with comparable scopes of work and durations. However, for a contract lasting approximately 13 months (from September 2006 to October 2007), this represents a significant investment. Contracts for simulation support can vary widely based on complexity, technology involved (e.g., virtual reality, live-virtual-constructive), and the specific military branch or agency. Without more granular data on the services rendered and the specific simulation systems supported, it's difficult to definitively benchmark this value. However, given the firm fixed price and full and open competition, it suggests the Army sought competitive bids for a defined set of simulation support services.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract?

The provided summary data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract. Typically, for a contract of this nature, KPIs might include system uptime, response times for support requests, successful simulation execution rates, user satisfaction surveys, or adherence to project timelines for any enhancements or modifications. The firm fixed price contract structure implies that Cubic Global Defense, Inc. was obligated to deliver the defined scope of services to a satisfactory standard to receive full payment. Further details on performance would likely reside in contract performance reports or post-award reviews.

What is the track record of Cubic Global Defense, Inc. in providing simulation support services to the government?

Cubic Global Defense, Inc. (now part of Cubic Corporation) has a long-standing history and significant presence in providing simulation and training solutions to military and government clients worldwide. They are known for developing and integrating complex training systems, including live, virtual, and constructive simulation environments. Their portfolio often includes solutions for air, ground, and naval forces, focusing on realistic training scenarios. While this specific $15.7 million contract represents one engagement, Cubic's broader track record suggests substantial experience and capability in the simulation support domain, often undertaking large-scale and technologically advanced projects.

Were there any identified risks or challenges associated with the performance of this contract?

The summary data does not explicitly list identified risks or challenges for this particular contract. However, general risks associated with simulation support contracts can include technological obsolescence, integration issues with existing systems, evolving training requirements, cybersecurity threats, and the need for highly specialized personnel. Given the firm fixed price nature, risks related to cost overruns would primarily fall on the contractor, assuming the scope was well-defined. The relatively short duration (383 days) might suggest a focused scope, potentially mitigating some long-term risks but requiring efficient execution.

How has the Department of the Army's spending on simulation support evolved since this contract was awarded in 2006?

Spending on simulation and training by the Department of the Army has generally increased and evolved significantly since 2006, driven by advancements in technology and changing operational demands. Post-2006, there has been a greater emphasis on network-centric warfare, sophisticated virtual and constructive simulations, and integrated live-virtual-constructive (LVC) training environments. Technologies like augmented and virtual reality have become more prevalent. While this $15.7 million contract was a specific procurement, overall Army spending in simulation and training has likely seen substantial growth, incorporating more advanced capabilities and potentially larger, more complex contracts for integrated training solutions and sustainment.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesAdministrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT)PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Cubic Corporation (UEI: 008382293)

Address: 4550 THIRD AVENUE SE, STE, LACEY, WA, 10

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,729,099

Exercised Options: $15,729,099

Current Obligation: $15,729,099

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W91QF404D0008

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2006-09-29

Current End Date: 2007-10-17

Potential End Date: 2007-10-17 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2010-03-02

More Contracts from Cubic Global Defense, Inc.

View all Cubic Global Defense, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending