DoD's $79.4M Standard Space Trainer contract with Sonalysts Inc. awarded after source exclusion

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $79,358,241 ($79.4M)

Contractor: Sonalysts Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-08-28

End Date: 2016-09-06

Contract Duration: 2,931 days

Daily Burn Rate: $27.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: STANDARD SPACE TRAINER (SST)

Place of Performance

Location: WATERFORD, NEW LONDON County, CONNECTICUT, 06385

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $79.4 million to SONALYSTS INC for work described as: STANDARD SPACE TRAINER (SST) Key points: 1. Contract awarded for research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, indicating potential for cost overruns. 3. Awarded by the Department of Defense, managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency. 4. The contract duration was 2931 days, spanning over 8 years. 5. The contract was competed under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources', suggesting a specific reason for excluding certain sources. 6. No small business set-aside was applied to this contract. 7. The contract was a definitive contract, typically used for complex or long-term requirements.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contracts for 'Standard Space Trainer' systems. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure can sometimes lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed tightly. However, CPFF is often used when the scope of work is not well-defined or involves significant research and development, which may justify the pricing structure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources'. This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources were excluded from the bidding process. The exact reasons for this exclusion are not detailed, but it suggests that only a subset of potential offerors were considered. This limited competition may have impacted the number of bids received and potentially the final price.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have received less competitive pricing due to the exclusion of certain sources, potentially limiting the number of viable bidders and the resulting price discovery.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Defense and its personnel who utilize the Standard Space Trainer for training. The services delivered involve research and development related to space training systems. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Defense's operational areas, though the development itself may be localized. Workforce implications include employment for researchers, engineers, and support staff involved in the development and potential implementation of the trainer.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion could lead to suboptimal pricing.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost escalation if not closely monitored.
Lack of transparency regarding the reasons for source exclusion raises questions about fairness and potential impact on innovation.
Long contract duration (over 8 years) increases the risk of scope creep and evolving requirements not being adequately addressed.

Positive Signals

Awarded to Sonalysts Inc., suggesting a potentially established relationship or expertise with the contractor.
The contract falls under Research and Development, indicating investment in future capabilities.
The definitive contract type implies a structured approach to a significant requirement.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The market for specialized training systems, particularly for complex fields like space operations, is niche but critical for defense and aerospace industries. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within R&D budgets for simulation and training technologies, often characterized by high upfront investment and long development cycles.

Small Business Impact

This contract did not include a small business set-aside, nor is there information indicating significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The focus on specialized R&D for a potentially complex system like a Standard Space Trainer suggests that the prime contractor likely possesses unique capabilities, and the nature of the work may not lend itself easily to broad subcontracting to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. Accountability measures would be embedded within the Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract terms, requiring detailed reporting and justification of costs. Transparency is often limited in R&D contracts, especially those involving classified or sensitive technologies, but standard reporting requirements should be in place.

Related Government Programs

Space Systems Development
Military Training Simulators
Aerospace Research and Development
Defense Contractor Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent cost overrun risk.
Long contract duration may lead to obsolescence or changing requirements.
Lack of detailed justification for source exclusion impacts transparency.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $79.4 million to SONALYSTS INC. STANDARD SPACE TRAINER (SST)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SONALYSTS 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 $79.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-08-28. End: 2016-09-06.

What was the specific justification for excluding certain sources in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award?

The provided data does not specify the exact reasons for excluding certain sources. Typically, such exclusions are based on factors like national security concerns, proprietary technology, unique capabilities required that only a limited number of entities possess, or previous performance issues with specific contractors. Without further documentation or agency explanation, it is impossible to definitively state the justification. This lack of transparency can be a concern for ensuring maximum competition and potentially the best value for taxpayer dollars, as it limits the pool of potential bidders and may prevent innovative solutions from other qualified companies.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types in terms of risk and potential cost?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is characterized by the government reimbursing the contractor for all allowable costs incurred, plus a fixed fee representing profit. This structure is often used for research and development or services where the scope is not precisely defined at the outset, making fixed-price contracts impractical. The primary risk for the government is cost overrun, as the contractor has less incentive to control costs once the fee is fixed. However, the fixed fee provides some predictability in profit. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPFF generally shifts more cost risk to the government. Conversely, it offers more flexibility than fixed-price contracts when dealing with uncertain project requirements, potentially leading to a more robust final product if managed effectively.

What is the typical performance track record of Sonalysts Inc. on similar government contracts?

Information regarding Sonalysts Inc.'s specific performance track record on similar government contracts is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any contract disputes, or awards/debarments. Generally, for a company to secure a large, long-term R&D contract like this from the Department of Defense, they would need to demonstrate a history of successful project completion and technical capability. However, without access to specific performance data, it's difficult to provide a definitive evaluation of their track record for this particular type of work.

What are the potential implications of the 8-year contract duration on the relevance and effectiveness of the Standard Space Trainer?

A contract duration of approximately 8 years (2931 days) for a Standard Space Trainer (SST) system presents both opportunities and risks. On the positive side, it allows for a sustained development effort, potentially leading to a highly refined and capable training system that evolves with technological advancements and operational needs. It also provides stability for the contractor and workforce. However, a long duration also increases the risk of technological obsolescence, changes in military requirements, or budget shifts that could render the system less relevant or effective by its completion. Continuous oversight and flexibility in contract modifications would be crucial to ensure the SST remains aligned with DoD's strategic objectives and technological landscape throughout its lifecycle.

How does the $79.4 million total award amount compare to other R&D contracts in the aerospace and defense sector?

The $79.4 million award for the Standard Space Trainer (SST) falls within a moderate range for significant Research and Development (R&D) contracts in the aerospace and defense sector. Large-scale R&D programs, especially those involving complex systems like space simulators or advanced weapon platforms, can easily reach hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. Conversely, smaller, more focused R&D efforts might be in the tens of millions. Therefore, this contract represents a substantial investment but is not exceptionally large compared to the upper echelon of defense R&D spending. Its value is best understood in the context of the specific capabilities it aims to develop and the criticality of those capabilities to the DoD's mission.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 215 PARKWAY N, WATERFORD, CT, 06385

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Subchapter S Corporation

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $129,812,421

Exercised Options: $80,558,161

Current Obligation: $79,358,241

Actual Outlays: $749,926

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline