DoD's $48M contract for KU Earth Terminals awarded to Datapath, Inc. via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $48,187,998 ($48.2M)

Contractor: Datapath, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-08-30

End Date: 2012-03-31

Contract Duration: 579 days

Daily Burn Rate: $83.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: DELIVERY ORDER IN SUPPORT OF DEPLOYABLE KU EARTH TERMINALS FOR HARDWARE AND SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: CEDAR RAPIDS, LINN County, IOWA, 52498, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Iowa Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $48.2 million to DATAPATH, INC. for work described as: DELIVERY ORDER IN SUPPORT OF DEPLOYABLE KU EARTH TERMINALS FOR HARDWARE AND SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for hardware and services related to deployable KU Earth terminals. 2. Full and open competition was utilized for this award. 3. The contract duration was 579 days. 4. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, indicating predictable costs. 5. The award was made by the Defense Contract Management Agency. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 334220. 7. The Product Service Code (PSC) is not specified, limiting detailed analysis of the goods/services. 8. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order (DO).

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more specific details on the hardware and services provided. The total award amount of approximately $48.2 million over a period of 579 days suggests a significant investment. However, without comparable contract data or a breakdown of costs for specific components or services, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract offers cost certainty to the government, which is a positive indicator.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. This method typically fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and innovation. The fact that it was competed openly is a positive sign for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs through market forces and encouraging a wider pool of suppliers to offer their best pricing.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from enhanced communication capabilities through these deployable KU Earth terminals. The contract supports the provision of essential hardware and services for critical communication infrastructure. The geographic impact is likely global, given the nature of military deployments. The contract may have implications for the defense communications workforce, requiring skilled personnel for operation and maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed breakdown of hardware and services makes it difficult to assess cost-effectiveness.
The Product Service Code (PSC) is not specified, hindering a deeper understanding of the procured items.
Limited information on contractor performance history for this specific type of terminal.
The contract duration is relatively short, which might imply a need for follow-on contracts or potential gaps in long-term support.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract supports critical defense communication infrastructure.
The award was made by the Defense Contract Management Agency, suggesting established oversight processes.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the telecommunications equipment manufacturing sector, specifically related to satellite communication hardware. The market for such equipment is driven by defense needs, commercial broadcasting, and global connectivity. The total award amount of approximately $48.2 million is a substantial figure for a specific set of terminals, but within the broader context of defense spending on communication systems, it represents a targeted investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other contracts for satellite terminals, ground station equipment, or related communication services.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there information regarding subcontracting plans. Given the nature of the equipment and services, it is possible that larger, specialized firms were the primary bidders. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved as subcontractors or if opportunities were missed.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractors meet performance and cost requirements. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of financial oversight by locking in costs. Transparency regarding the specific deliverables and performance metrics would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment of oversight effectiveness. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Satellite Communications Systems
Tactical Communications Equipment
Deployable Communication Systems
Ground Support Equipment for Satellite Communications

Risk Flags

Lack of detailed scope of work
Unspecified Product Service Code (PSC)
Limited contractor performance data available
No breakdown of hardware vs. services costs

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $48.2 million to DATAPATH, INC.. DELIVERY ORDER IN SUPPORT OF DEPLOYABLE KU EARTH TERMINALS FOR HARDWARE AND SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DATAPATH, 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: 2010-08-30. End: 2012-03-31.

What specific types of hardware and services were included in this $48.2 million contract for KU Earth terminals?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'DELIVERY ORDER IN SUPPORT OF DEPLOYABLE KU EARTH TERMINALS FOR HARDWARE AND SERVICES.' However, it does not specify the exact types of hardware (e.g., specific antenna models, modems, power supplies) or the nature of the services (e.g., installation, maintenance, training, software support). This lack of detail prevents a granular assessment of the value proposition and makes it difficult to compare pricing against industry standards for individual components or service packages. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work would be necessary to ascertain the precise scope of deliverables.

How does the per-unit cost of these KU Earth terminals compare to market rates or similar government contracts?

Without a breakdown of the number of terminals procured and the specific hardware configurations, calculating a meaningful per-unit cost is not possible from the provided data. The total award of $48.2 million covers both hardware and services over a period of 579 days. To perform a per-unit cost comparison, one would need to know the quantity of terminals, the specific model and capabilities of each terminal, and the associated service costs. Benchmarking would then involve comparing these figures against publicly available pricing for similar military-grade or commercial KU-band terminals and associated support contracts, which are not detailed in this summary.

What was the track record of Datapath, Inc. in delivering similar deployable KU Earth terminal solutions prior to this award?

The provided data identifies Datapath, Inc. as the contractor but does not offer details on their past performance or specific experience with deployable KU Earth terminals. A comprehensive assessment of contractor track record would require reviewing past performance evaluations, other relevant contracts held by Datapath, and their demonstrated capabilities in providing similar systems. Without this information, it's challenging to gauge their reliability and expertise specifically for this type of technology and deployment scenario. Government contract databases and past performance reviews would typically contain this information.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract, and how was performance assessed?

The provided data does not include information on the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) established for this contract or the methods used for performance assessment. Typically, for hardware and services contracts, KPIs might include factors like terminal uptime, data throughput, reliability rates, response times for maintenance, and successful installation within specified timelines. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) would likely have been involved in monitoring performance against the contract's requirements. However, without access to the contract's statement of work and performance reports, a detailed analysis of success metrics is not feasible.

How does the total spending on deployable KU Earth terminals compare to historical spending patterns for similar communication systems within the Department of Defense?

The provided data focuses on a single contract award of approximately $48.2 million. To analyze historical spending patterns, one would need access to broader budget data and contract databases covering multiple years and various types of communication systems within the DoD. This would allow for a comparison of spending trends, identifying whether investments in deployable KU Earth terminals have increased, decreased, or remained stable relative to other communication technologies. Such an analysis would provide context on the strategic importance and resource allocation for this capability over time.

What are the potential risks associated with relying on Datapath, Inc. for these critical communication hardware and services?

Potential risks associated with relying on Datapath, Inc. for these critical communication hardware and services could include factors such as the contractor's financial stability, their capacity to meet delivery schedules, the quality and reliability of the hardware provided, and the effectiveness of their support services. Without specific past performance data or insights into the company's operational capacity for this contract, these remain general risks. Additionally, dependence on a single supplier for critical components can pose supply chain risks. A thorough risk assessment would involve reviewing contractor performance history, financial health, and contingency planning.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Communications Equipment Manufacturing › Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

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

Address: 400 COLLINS RD NE, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA, 52498

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $109,805,103

Exercised Options: $48,187,998

Current Obligation: $48,187,998

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W15P7T06DL215

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline