Air Force R&D contract awarded to University of Dayton for $19.46M, focusing on defense operational system development

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,461,629 ($19.5M)

Contractor: University of Dayton

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-03-03

End Date: 2011-11-30

Contract Duration: 2,098 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200610!008357!5700!FA8650!DET 1 AFRL/PK !FA865006C7615 !A!N! !Y! ! !20060303!20110303!073134025!073134025!073134025!N!THE UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON !300 COLLEGE PARK AVE !DAYTON !OH!45469!21000!113!39!DAYTON !MONTGOMERY !OHIO !+000000010272!N!N!000009899980!AD97!RDTE/OTHER DEFENSE-OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541720!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !A!N!U!2!001!B! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!V!N! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: DAYTON, MONTGOMERY County, OHIO, 45469

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.5 million to UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON for work described as: 200610!008357!5700!FA8650!DET 1 AFRL/PK !FA865006C7615 !A!N! !Y! ! !20060303!20110303!073134025!073134025!073134025!N!THE UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON !300 COLLEGE PARK AVE !DAYTON !OH!45469!21000!113!39!DAYTON !MONT… Key points: 1. The contract value of $19.46 million represents a significant investment in defense operational system development. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open process, suggesting a potentially competitive bidding environment. 3. The contract's duration of nearly 6 years implies a long-term commitment to research and development. 4. Performance context is tied to the Air Force Research Laboratory, highlighting a focus on advanced military capabilities. 5. Sector positioning is within Research and Development, specifically operational system development, a critical area for defense modernization. 6. The contractor, University of Dayton, has a track record in research, though specific performance on this contract requires further analysis.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $19.46 million for nearly six years of research and development appears reasonable given the specialized nature of defense operational system development. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts is challenging without more specific details on the scope of work. However, the cost-plus-fixed-fee structure suggests that while the contractor has an incentive to control costs, the government bears the risk of cost overruns. Further analysis of the final cost versus the initial estimate would provide a clearer picture of value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The number of bidders is not specified in the provided data, which limits a detailed assessment of the competition's intensity. However, a full and open competition generally promotes price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive pricing to win the award.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining the best value through a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to lower overall costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the Air Force, which will receive advancements in operational system development. The services delivered are focused on research and development, aiming to enhance military capabilities and technological superiority. The geographic impact is primarily within Ohio, where the University of Dayton is located, potentially creating local economic benefits and research opportunities. Workforce implications include the potential for highly skilled researchers, engineers, and support staff at the University of Dayton to be engaged in critical defense projects.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the R&D.
The cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed.
Limited information on the number of bidders in the full and open competition makes it hard to gauge the true level of competition.
The long duration of the contract could introduce risks related to technological obsolescence or shifting defense priorities.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
The contractor, University of Dayton, is an established research institution.
The contract focuses on a critical area of defense modernization: operational system development.
The contract value is substantial, indicating a significant commitment to advancing defense technology.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on defense operational systems. The R&D sector is characterized by innovation and the pursuit of new technologies. Comparable spending benchmarks for defense R&D can vary widely depending on the specific technology and agency. However, contracts of this magnitude often support long-term strategic goals for national security and technological advancement within the defense industrial base.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the primary awardee is a university. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific prime contract appears limited, though the university may engage small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Air Force, likely through the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's terms, including reporting requirements and performance milestones. Transparency is facilitated by the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), which publishes contract awards. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Contracts
Department of Defense Research and Development Programs
Operational System Development Contracts
University Research Partnerships with Government

Risk Flags

Cost Overrun Risk (CPFF Contract)
Performance Measurement Difficulty (R&D)
Limited Competition Data (Number of Bidders Unknown)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.5 million to UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON. 200610!008357!5700!FA8650!DET 1 AFRL/PK !FA865006C7615 !A!N! !Y! ! !20060303!20110303!073134025!073134025!073134025!N!THE UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON !300 COLLEGE PARK AVE !DAYTON !OH!45469!21000!113!39!DAYTON !MONTGOMERY !OHIO !+000000010272!N!N!000009899980!AD97!RDTE/OTHER DEFENSE-OPERATIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541720!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON.

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 $19.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-03-03. End: 2011-11-30.

What is the University of Dayton's track record with similar defense R&D contracts?

The University of Dayton has a history of engaging in research and development, often in collaboration with government agencies, including the Department of Defense. While specific details on past defense operational system development contracts are not provided here, their designation as a research institution suggests experience in managing complex research projects. Further investigation into their portfolio of government contracts, particularly those with the Air Force and related to systems development, would be necessary to fully assess their track record. Publicly available data may offer insights into the types and scale of previous awards and their performance history, if available.

How does the $19.46 million contract value compare to similar defense operational system development contracts?

Benchmarking the $19.46 million contract value requires comparing it to similar contracts for defense operational system development, which can be challenging due to the specialized nature of such work and variations in scope, duration, and technological complexity. Contracts for R&D in defense can range from a few million to hundreds of millions of dollars. This particular contract, awarded over nearly six years, suggests a significant, long-term investment. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts with detailed scope definitions, a precise comparison is difficult. However, the value appears substantial enough to indicate a project of considerable importance to the Air Force's operational capabilities.

What are the primary risks associated with this cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract?

The primary risk associated with a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) contract is that the government may end up paying more than anticipated if the contractor's costs exceed initial estimates. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with a guaranteed profit margin, the government bears the financial risk of cost overruns. Effective oversight, stringent cost controls, and clear performance metrics are crucial to mitigate this risk. The contractor has an incentive to manage costs to avoid exceeding the estimated cost base, but the ultimate financial exposure lies with the government. Regular audits and progress reviews are essential to monitor expenditures and ensure the project remains within reasonable financial bounds.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' process in ensuring value for money for this type of R&D contract?

A 'full and open competition' process is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in government contracting, as it allows all responsible sources to compete. This broad competition can drive down prices and encourage innovation as contractors strive to offer the best technical solution at the most competitive price. For R&D contracts, where the scope can be less defined and innovation is key, a competitive process helps identify the most capable and cost-effective provider. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the clarity of the solicitation, the number and quality of bids received, and the government's ability to accurately evaluate proposals against defined criteria. Without knowing the number of bidders, it's hard to definitively say how competitive this specific instance was.

What are the historical spending patterns for defense operational system development by the Department of the Air Force?

Historical spending patterns for defense operational system development by the Department of the Air Force show a consistent and significant investment in modernizing military capabilities. This spending is driven by the need to maintain technological superiority and adapt to evolving threats. Budgets allocated to R&D, particularly for systems development, are often substantial and fluctuate based on strategic priorities, technological advancements, and geopolitical factors. The Air Force frequently awards contracts for developing advanced communication, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), and command and control systems. Analyzing past budgets and contract awards within this category would reveal trends in investment areas and the types of technologies prioritized over time.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: BASIC RESEARCH

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 300 COLLEGE PARK AVE, DAYTON, OH, 10

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,272

Exercised Options: $10,272

Current Obligation: $19,461,629

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline