DoD's $34.8M contract for steelworker and EOD content conversion awarded to Chickasaw Aerospace

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,866,835 ($34.9M)

Contractor: Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-04-19

End Date: 2027-04-18

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $31.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: RRL CONTENT CONVERSION FOR STEELWORKERS (SW) AND EXPLOSIVE ORDINANCE DEVICES (EOD).

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, ORANGE County, FLORIDA, 32826

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.9 million to CHICKASAW AEROSPACE, LLC for work described as: RRL CONTENT CONVERSION FOR STEELWORKERS (SW) AND EXPLOSIVE ORDINANCE DEVICES (EOD). Key points: 1. The contract's value of $34.8 million for content conversion services appears to be a significant investment in specialized technical documentation. 2. Awarded as a definitive contract, the specific details regarding competition are limited, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies. 3. The duration of nearly three years suggests a substantial and ongoing need for these conversion services. 4. The contract's focus on steelworker and explosive ordnance device content indicates a niche but critical area of military support. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted to boost small business participation. 6. The cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing structure means the final cost could fluctuate based on actual expenses incurred by the contractor.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more specific details on the scope of 'content conversion' and the complexity of the materials involved. However, the $34.8 million price tag for engineering services over approximately three years suggests a considerable investment. Comparing it to similar contracts for technical documentation or specialized content management would be necessary for a more precise value assessment. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure introduces variability, making it harder to definitively assess if the price is optimal without understanding the contractor's cost drivers.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' (NAF) basis, indicating a sole-source procurement. This means that the Department of the Navy identified a specific contractor, Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC, as the only source capable of fulfilling the requirement. The lack of competition means that price discovery through a bidding process was bypassed, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple vendors had competed.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there was no opportunity to benefit from competitive pricing, which could result in a less favorable price for the government and, by extension, taxpayers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Navy and its personnel who rely on accurate and accessible technical documentation for steelworker and explosive ordnance device operations. The services delivered involve the conversion of existing content, implying an effort to modernize, standardize, or improve the usability of critical technical information. The geographic impact is primarily within Florida, where the contractor is located, but the ultimate impact is on naval operations nationwide and potentially globally. Workforce implications include the employment of personnel at Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC, who possess specialized skills in content conversion and technical documentation for defense applications.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially impacting cost-effectiveness.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully.
Lack of detailed scope for 'content conversion' makes it difficult to assess the true value and necessity.
The specific nature of 'steelworker' and 'EOD' content suggests a highly specialized niche, raising questions about the breadth of potential contractors.

Positive Signals

Contract addresses critical operational needs for specialized military content.
Awarding to a specific LLC suggests a focused effort to leverage particular expertise.
Definitive contract structure provides a framework for a defined period of service.
The duration of the contract indicates a sustained requirement and commitment to the service.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS code 541330), which is a broad category encompassing various specialized engineering disciplines. The market for defense-related technical documentation and content conversion is highly specialized, often requiring contractors with specific security clearances and expertise in niche military fields like Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) and specialized trades such as steelworking. While the overall engineering services market is vast, contracts for highly specific content conversion for defense applications represent a smaller, more focused segment. Benchmarks for such niche services are difficult to establish without direct comparisons to similar defense content conversion projects.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the procurement process did not prioritize or mandate small business participation. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a small business set-aside. The award to Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC, a specific entity, does not inherently provide insights into its size or whether it engages in subcontracting with small businesses, which would require further investigation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be defined within the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award and the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' designation. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or alleged.

Related Government Programs

Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)
Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Documentation Support
Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Training and Support Programs
Military Technical Manual Conversion Services
Department of Defense Content Management Systems

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive scrutiny.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure introduces potential for cost overruns.
Lack of detailed scope definition for 'content conversion'.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.9 million to CHICKASAW AEROSPACE, LLC. RRL CONTENT CONVERSION FOR STEELWORKERS (SW) AND EXPLOSIVE ORDINANCE DEVICES (EOD).

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CHICKASAW AEROSPACE, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $34.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-04-19. End: 2027-04-18.

What is the specific nature and scope of the 'content conversion' for steelworkers and EOD?

The provided data lacks specific details on the exact nature and scope of the 'content conversion' for steelworkers and Explosive Ordnance Devices (EOD). Typically, 'content conversion' in a defense context can refer to updating outdated technical manuals, digitizing paper-based documents, migrating legacy data to new platforms, or reformatting information for different delivery methods (e.g., web-based, mobile). Given the mention of steelworkers and EOD, the content likely pertains to operational procedures, maintenance guides, safety protocols, or training materials critical for personnel in these specialized roles. The $34.8 million value suggests a substantial volume or complexity of information requiring conversion, potentially involving intricate diagrams, specialized terminology, and strict adherence to military standards.

How does the $34.8 million cost compare to similar defense content conversion contracts?

Direct comparison of the $34.8 million cost for this contract is difficult without access to a comprehensive database of similar defense content conversion projects. The value is substantial, suggesting a large scope of work or highly specialized requirements. Factors influencing cost include the volume of content, the complexity of the source material (e.g., legacy formats, handwritten notes, intricate schematics), the required output formats, security requirements, and the level of technical expertise needed. Contracts for converting highly technical or sensitive military documentation, especially those involving niche areas like EOD, can command higher prices due to the specialized knowledge and rigorous quality control involved. A thorough benchmark would require identifying contracts with comparable objectives, contractor expertise, and contract types.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for this type of service?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for this type of service, such as content conversion for specialized military needs, include a lack of competitive pricing, potentially leading to higher costs for the government. Without competition, there is reduced incentive for the contractor to optimize efficiency or offer the most cost-effective solutions. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, where the government becomes dependent on a single provider, making future transitions difficult or expensive. Furthermore, the absence of multiple bidders means a reduced pool of potential innovations or alternative approaches that might have been brought forward by a competitive field. Oversight becomes even more critical to ensure fair pricing and satisfactory performance.

What is the track record of Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC in providing similar content conversion services?

Information regarding the specific track record of Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC in providing 'content conversion' services, particularly for defense-related steelworker and EOD materials, is not detailed in the provided data. As this was a sole-source award, the Department of the Navy likely had a basis for selecting Chickasaw Aerospace, which could include prior performance, specialized capabilities, or existing relationships. To assess their track record, one would need to examine past performance evaluations, other contracts awarded to the company, and their demonstrated expertise in technical documentation, content management, and the specific subject matter areas (steelworking, EOD). Without this external data, it's challenging to definitively evaluate their suitability and past success.

How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract type influence the financial risk for the government?

The Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) contract type means the government agrees to pay the contractor for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This structure shifts some financial risk to the government, as the final contract price is not fixed upfront and can exceed initial estimates if costs escalate. While the 'fixed fee' component provides some predictability regarding the contractor's profit, the total expenditure is subject to the actual costs incurred. Effective oversight and robust cost accounting standards are crucial for CPFF contracts to ensure that only reasonable and necessary costs are reimbursed. This contract type is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or when there is uncertainty about the costs involved, as is potentially the case with specialized content conversion.

What are the historical spending patterns for content conversion services within the Department of the Navy or DoD?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for content conversion services within the Department of the Navy or the broader Department of Defense. Analyzing historical spending would involve examining past contract awards for similar services, identifying trends in contract values, durations, and types of contractors. This would help contextualize the $34.8 million award, determining if it represents a typical investment, an increase, or a decrease in spending for such services. Understanding historical patterns can also reveal shifts in technology, requirements, or the market landscape for defense content management and conversion.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: TRAINING AIDS AND DEVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2600 JOHN SAXON BLVD STE 2222, NORMAN, OK, 73071

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $34,866,835

Exercised Options: $34,866,835

Current Obligation: $34,866,835

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline