DoD's $41.3M R&D contract with HII Mission Technologies Corp shows long-term engagement in physical sciences

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $41,293,476 ($41.3M)

Contractor: HII Mission Technologies Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2000-02-17

End Date: 2005-07-31

Contract Duration: 1,991 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 15

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Place of Performance

Location: DAYTON, GREENE County, OHIO, 45430

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $41.3 million to HII MISSION TECHNOLOGIES CORP for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded in 2000 for research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences. 2. HII Mission Technologies Corp has a significant history with this contract, spanning over 1991 months. 3. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, indicating performance incentives. 4. Awarded by the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Air Force. 5. The contract was competed under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources', suggesting a specific rationale for limited initial bidders. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541710 points to R&D in physical, engineering, and life sciences. 7. The contract's duration and value suggest a substantial, ongoing research effort.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $41.3 million over its extended period suggests a moderate investment in R&D. Benchmarking this against similar long-term, specialized R&D contracts is challenging without more specific project details. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure implies that the final cost could vary based on performance, making a direct price comparison difficult. However, the extended duration indicates a sustained need and potentially a fair value if research objectives were met.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was competed under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources'. This designation typically means that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were excluded for specific, documented reasons, possibly related to national security, proprietary technology, or prior performance. The number of bidders is not specified, but this competition type suggests a more controlled procurement process than a standard full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: This competition type may limit the number of potential offerors, potentially impacting the government's ability to secure the lowest possible price compared to a truly open competition with maximum bidder participation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Defense and the Air Force, receiving advanced research and development outcomes. The services delivered are in the realm of physical, engineering, and life sciences research, contributing to technological advancement. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting national defense capabilities. Workforce implications include employment for scientists, engineers, and support staff involved in the R&D activities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' designation warrants scrutiny to ensure the exclusion criteria were justified and did not unduly limit competition.
The Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires careful monitoring to ensure award fees are tied to objective performance metrics and do not inflate costs unnecessarily.
The extended duration of the contract (implied by 'dur': 1991) raises questions about the initial planning and potential scope creep over time.

Positive Signals

The contract's long duration suggests a stable, long-term partnership that has likely yielded valuable research outcomes for the DoD.
The Cost Plus Award Fee structure, when managed effectively, can incentivize contractors to exceed performance expectations.
The specific R&D focus in physical, engineering, and life sciences indicates investment in critical technological areas for national security.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This is a critical area for defense innovation, supporting the development of new technologies and capabilities. The market for defense R&D is characterized by specialized firms, long development cycles, and significant government investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend heavily on the specific sub-field of R&D, but contracts of this value often represent significant, multi-year research initiatives.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration ('sb': false). This suggests the contract was likely awarded to a large business capable of undertaking complex R&D. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses, which would be a key area to investigate for potential impacts on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Department of the Air Force. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure necessitates robust performance monitoring and evaluation to justify any award fees. Transparency would be assessed through contract reporting mechanisms and public contract databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Research and Development Programs
Air Force Science and Technology Investments
Advanced Technology Development Contracts
Physical Sciences Research Initiatives
Engineering Research and Development

Risk Flags

Competition Level: 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' requires justification for excluded parties.
Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee necessitates robust performance monitoring to ensure value.
Contract Duration: Extended period warrants review for potential scope creep or evolving requirements.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $41.3 million to HII MISSION TECHNOLOGIES CORP. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HII MISSION TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $41.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-02-17. End: 2005-07-31.

What specific research objectives were outlined in the original contract, and how have they evolved over its extended period?

The original contract, awarded in 2000, focused on 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' under NAICS code 541710. Specific objectives are not detailed in the provided data. However, given the contract's duration and the nature of R&D, it's probable that the initial objectives were broad, allowing for adaptation as scientific understanding and technological needs evolved. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure suggests that performance against defined milestones or objectives was crucial for contractor compensation beyond base costs. A deeper dive into contract modifications, performance reports, and technical documentation would be necessary to trace the evolution of research goals and assess their alignment with DoD priorities over the years.

How does the $41.3 million total award value compare to the typical investment in similar long-term R&D projects within the physical sciences for the Air Force?

The $41.3 million total award value for this R&D contract, spanning potentially many years (indicated by 'dur': 1991, though this likely represents a different metric than calendar years), represents a significant but not extraordinary investment for the Department of Defense. Benchmarking requires understanding the specific sub-discipline within physical sciences, the project's technological maturity, and the duration. For instance, foundational research might have lower total costs than advanced prototype development. However, compared to major weapon system R&D, $41.3 million is moderate. The Air Force invests billions annually in R&D, so this contract likely represents a focused effort within a specific scientific domain, potentially yielding critical advancements that justify the sustained funding.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the 'Award Fee' component of this Cost Plus Award Fee contract?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the 'Award Fee' component of this Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract. In CPAF contracts, the government establishes a range of potential award fees based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. These criteria are typically outlined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Objectives (SOO) and can include factors such as technical achievement, schedule adherence, cost control (though less emphasized in CPAF than CPFF), innovation, and responsiveness to government direction. The contracting officer or a designated representative evaluates the contractor's performance against these metrics, often through formal reviews, and determines the amount of award fee, if any, to be granted. Without access to the specific contract documentation, the exact KPIs remain unknown.

Given the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' designation, what were the likely reasons for excluding other potential bidders, and did this impact overall cost-effectiveness?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' (F&O CAEoS) designation implies that while the procurement was intended to be competitive, specific sources were deliberately excluded. Common reasons for such exclusions include national security concerns, requirements for highly specialized or proprietary technology, or the need to leverage unique capabilities developed under prior related contracts. For example, if the R&D built directly upon classified work or patented processes held by a limited number of entities, exclusion might be justified. While CAEoS aims for competition among the remaining eligible sources, the exclusion inherently limits the bidder pool. This could potentially reduce price competition compared to a truly open solicitation, although the government might argue that the specialized nature of the work necessitates such a tailored approach to ensure the best technical solution is obtained, thereby achieving long-term cost-effectiveness through superior outcomes.

What is the track record of HII Mission Technologies Corp in fulfilling similar large-scale R&D contracts for the Department of Defense?

HII Mission Technologies Corp (formerly Huntington Ingalls Industries) has a substantial track record in supporting the Department of Defense across various domains, including complex R&D, engineering services, and mission support. While the specific details of their performance on this particular $41.3 million contract are not provided, HII is a major defense contractor known for its capabilities in areas like naval systems, C5ISR, cyber, and advanced technologies. Their history suggests they possess the organizational capacity, technical expertise, and financial stability to manage large-scale R&D efforts. Performance on similar contracts would typically be assessed through past performance evaluations during recompetes and through contract data reporting systems. Generally, large, established contractors like HII are expected to meet rigorous performance standards set by the DoD.

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: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 15

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Address: 4021 EXECUTIVE DRIVE, DAYTON, OH, 10

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline