Air Force awards $322M option year for technical services to MITRE Corporation, extending a long-standing contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $322,081,215 ($322.1M)

Contractor: THE Mitre Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-10-01

End Date: 2014-02-28

Contract Duration: 1,611 days

Daily Burn Rate: $199.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: EXERCISE OPTION YEAR 1 FOR CONTACT FA8721-09-C-0002

Place of Performance

Location: BEDFORD, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01730

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $322.1 million to THE MITRE CORPORATION for work described as: EXERCISE OPTION YEAR 1 FOR CONTACT FA8721-09-C-0002 Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in specialized technical expertise. 2. The sole-source nature of the award warrants scrutiny regarding potential cost efficiencies. 3. Long contract duration suggests a critical, ongoing need for the services provided. 4. Performance history of MITRE Corporation is key to assessing continued value. 5. The 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' NAICS code indicates broad applicability of the services. 6. The contract's structure as 'Cost No Fee' requires careful monitoring of expenditures against objectives.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific service details and comparable contracts. The 'Cost No Fee' (Cost Plus Fixed Fee or Cost Plus Incentive Fee are more common) contract type, while less common for large option years, suggests that the government is primarily concerned with covering the contractor's allowable costs and potentially a fixed fee. The total obligated amount of $322 million over its extended period indicates a substantial commitment. Without more granular data on the specific services rendered and their outcomes, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult, but the extended duration and significant funding suggest a perceived necessity.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities or when it's deemed in the government's best interest to continue with an incumbent. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for other firms to bid, potentially limiting price discovery and innovation that could arise from a competitive bidding process. The justification for sole-source awards should be robust to ensure fair pricing and access for other capable businesses.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. It also limits opportunities for new or smaller businesses to enter the federal contracting space.

Public Impact

The Department of the Air Force benefits from continuous access to specialized technical and scientific expertise. Services likely support critical defense missions, research, and development initiatives. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Defense's operational and research facilities. Workforce implications may include the retention of highly skilled technical personnel within the contractor organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced efficiency.
The 'Cost No Fee' contract type can incentivize spending without a direct link to performance outcomes.
Long-term sole-source awards can create vendor lock-in, hindering future flexibility and cost savings.
Transparency into the specific services rendered and their impact is limited by the broad NAICS code.

Positive Signals

The extension of the contract indicates satisfactory performance and a continued need for MITRE's specialized services.
MITRE Corporation has a long-standing history of supporting government technical needs, suggesting established expertise.
The significant funding level implies the services are critical to the Air Force's mission objectives.
The contract's duration suggests a stable and predictable support structure for the agency.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls under the 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' category (NAICS 541990), a broad sector encompassing a wide range of specialized expertise. This sector is crucial for government agencies requiring support in areas like systems engineering, research, analysis, and program management. The federal government is a major consumer of these services, with spending often concentrated in defense, intelligence, and scientific research. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the broad nature of the NAICS code, but contracts for similar technical support services can range from millions to billions of dollars annually.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'ss': false and 'sb': false. The large dollar value and sole-source nature suggest it is unlikely to be structured for small business participation. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific contract are likely limited, unless MITRE Corporation voluntarily engages them for specific tasks.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the program office within the Department of the Air Force. The 'Cost No Fee' structure necessitates rigorous financial oversight to ensure that all costs incurred are allowable, reasonable, and allocable to the contract. Transparency is dependent on the reporting requirements stipulated in the contract. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Research and Development
Air Force Systems Engineering Support
Technical Consulting Services
Federal IT and Technical Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing pressure.
Cost-reimbursement contract type requires diligent oversight of expenditures.
Broad NAICS code limits understanding of specific services and value.
Long contract duration may indicate potential for vendor lock-in.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $322.1 million to THE MITRE CORPORATION. EXERCISE OPTION YEAR 1 FOR CONTACT FA8721-09-C-0002

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE MITRE CORPORATION.

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 $322.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-10-01. End: 2014-02-28.

What is the historical spending trend for this contract since its inception?

The provided data indicates the contract FA8721-09-C-0002 was awarded in 2009 with an initial duration extending to 2014, and this specific data point refers to an option year exercise. The total obligated amount for this option year is $322,081,214.67. To understand the historical spending trend, one would need to examine the contract's award history, including all modifications, option exercises, and task orders issued since 2009. This would reveal the cumulative spending over time and how it has fluctuated year-over-year. Without access to the full contract file and its modification history, a complete trend analysis is not possible. However, the substantial amount for a single option year suggests a consistent and significant level of funding throughout the contract's life.

How does the per-unit cost of services compare to industry benchmarks for similar technical support?

Determining a precise per-unit cost for comparison is challenging with the provided data. The contract type is 'Cost No Fee,' which means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a fee. The total obligated amount of $322 million is for a period of performance, not necessarily a fixed quantity of units. To benchmark, we would need to know the specific services rendered (e.g., hours of engineering support, number of analyses performed, specific research tasks completed) and their associated costs. Without this granularity, comparing to industry benchmarks for 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' is speculative. Generally, sole-source contracts, especially those with cost-reimbursement structures, can be at higher risk of not achieving optimal value compared to competitively bid fixed-price contracts, but this depends heavily on the specific nature of the services and the oversight applied.

What are the specific deliverables and performance metrics associated with this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact deliverables or performance metrics for this contract. The NAICS code '541990 - All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' is very broad, encompassing a wide array of potential services. The contract type 'Cost No Fee' (likely a variation of Cost Plus) implies that the government pays for allowable costs incurred by the contractor, plus a fee. Performance is typically assessed through contract clauses that define requirements, milestones, and quality standards. For a contract of this magnitude and duration, detailed statements of work (SOWs) and performance work statements (PWSs) would exist, outlining specific outputs, reporting requirements, and evaluation criteria. Without access to these documents, the precise nature of the deliverables and how performance is measured remains unknown.

What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The data indicates the contract was awarded under 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which signifies a sole-source justification. Common reasons for sole-source awards include the unique capability of a single contractor, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or when the contract is a follow-on to a previously competed effort where only one contractor can provide the necessary services. The MITRE Corporation is a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) known for its deep technical expertise and long history of supporting government agencies, particularly in defense and aerospace. It is plausible that the Air Force determined MITRE possessed unique, indispensable capabilities for the services required, making competition impractical or detrimental to national security interests. A formal justification document (e.g., Justification and Approval - J&A) would typically detail the specific rationale.

What is the track record of The MITRE Corporation in fulfilling similar government contracts?

The MITRE Corporation has an extensive and generally well-regarded track record of serving U.S. government agencies, particularly within the Department of Defense and intelligence communities. As a non-profit FFRDC, its primary mission is to serve the public interest by applying systems engineering, research, and development expertise to complex national challenges. They manage numerous contracts across various agencies, often focusing on advanced technology, cybersecurity, and strategic planning. While specific performance details for FA8721-09-C-0002 are not provided, MITRE's overall reputation suggests a high level of technical competence. However, like any large contractor, individual contract performance can vary, and scrutiny of specific deliverables and cost management is always warranted, especially for large, sole-source awards.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › OTHER RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 202 BURLINGTON RD, BEDFORD, MA, 06

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Federally Funded Research and Development Corp, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $360,047,414

Exercised Options: $322,908,396

Current Obligation: $322,081,215

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Timeline