DoD awards $12.7M for courseware design, with Chickasaw Aerospace securing the sole-source contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,709,500 ($12.7M)

Contractor: Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-09-24

End Date: 2027-09-28

Contract Duration: 734 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: COURSEWARE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT.

Place of Performance

Location: NORMAN, CLEVELAND County, OKLAHOMA, 73071

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.7 million to CHICKASAW AEROSPACE, LLC for work described as: COURSEWARE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT. Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating clear cost expectations. 2. Sole-source award suggests limited market options or specific contractor capabilities. 3. Contract duration of 734 days provides a substantial period for development. 4. The award falls under Engineering Services (NAICS 541330). 5. Department of the Navy is the primary procuring agency. 6. No indication of small business set-aside or subcontracting goals.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this courseware design contract is challenging without comparable sole-source awards or detailed scope of work. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the absence of competition limits the potential for price discovery and aggressive negotiation. The total value of $12.7 million over approximately two years suggests a significant investment in specialized training development.

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 among multiple vendors. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or when urgent needs preclude a full and open competition. The lack of competition means the government did not benefit from a bidding process that could drive down prices or foster innovation through diverse proposals.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the best possible price due to the absence of competitive bidding. The justification for a sole-source award needs to be robust to ensure funds are used efficiently.

Public Impact

Naval personnel will benefit from enhanced and potentially modernized training materials. The services delivered will focus on the design and development of courseware. Geographic impact is likely concentrated where Naval training occurs. Workforce implications include the need for skilled instructional designers and developers at Chickasaw Aerospace.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential innovation.
Lack of transparency on the justification for sole-source procurement.
No clear indication of performance metrics or quality assurance measures.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Long contract duration allows for thorough development.
Award to a specific contractor suggests specialized expertise.

Sector Analysis

The defense sector heavily relies on specialized courseware for training personnel across various branches and roles. This contract for courseware design and development fits within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services market, specifically engineering services. The market for defense training solutions is substantial, with significant government spending allocated annually to ensure readiness and proficiency. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other contracts for instructional system design and digital learning platform development.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is also no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors, are not guaranteed and may be limited.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, requiring the contractor to deliver specified courseware within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency regarding the sole-source justification and performance reporting would be key areas for oversight. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Training Systems
Instructional Design Services
Naval Education and Training Command
Military Simulation and Training

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competition.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in summary data.
Potential for scope creep in development contracts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.7 million to CHICKASAW AEROSPACE, LLC. COURSEWARE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT.

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 $12.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-09-24. End: 2027-09-28.

What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded as 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which is synonymous with a sole-source award. The specific justification for this determination is not detailed in the provided data snippet. Typically, sole-source awards are justified when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services, such as when the service involves unique capabilities, proprietary data, or urgent and compelling circumstances that preclude competition. A thorough review of the contract file and associated documentation would be necessary to ascertain the precise rationale employed by the Department of the Navy.

How does the $12.7 million contract value compare to similar courseware development contracts within the Department of Defense?

Directly comparing the $12.7 million value requires access to a broader dataset of similar courseware development contracts, ideally those awarded by the Department of the Navy or other DoD components for comparable services. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this represents a high, low, or average value. However, considering the contract duration of approximately two years (734 days) and the firm-fixed-price nature, the annual value is roughly $6.35 million. This figure can be used as a preliminary benchmark, but a comprehensive analysis would involve examining contract scope, complexity, and the specific technologies or methodologies employed.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or deliverables expected under this contract?

The provided data specifies the contract is for 'COURSEWARE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT.' While the data confirms the award type (Definitive Contract), pricing structure (Firm Fixed Price), and duration, it does not detail the specific deliverables or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Typically, courseware development contracts would outline requirements such as the number of modules to be developed, specific learning objectives to be met, adherence to instructional design standards (e.g., ADDIE model), user interface design specifications, accessibility compliance, and final product delivery formats (e.g., SCORM compliant modules). Performance would likely be assessed based on the timely delivery of these specified outputs and their alignment with the government's requirements.

What is Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in courseware development?

The provided data indicates Chickasaw Aerospace, LLC is the contractor for this $12.7 million courseware design and development contract with the Department of the Navy. To assess their track record, one would need to consult historical contract databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) to identify previous awards to this company from the DoD. Key aspects to examine would include the types of services previously rendered, contract values, performance ratings (if available), and any history of contract modifications, disputes, or terminations. A positive track record in similar, complex development projects would suggest a lower performance risk for this current contract.

Are there any identified risks associated with this contract, such as technical challenges or contractor performance issues?

The primary risk identified from the provided data is the sole-source nature of the award ('NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'). This limits the government's ability to leverage competitive pressures to ensure optimal pricing and potentially restricts access to a wider range of innovative solutions. Other potential risks, not explicitly stated but common in such contracts, could include technical challenges in designing complex courseware, potential scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined, and contractor performance risks, although the 'st': 'OK' and 'sn': 'OKLAHOMA' status might suggest a generally satisfactory operational standing. A deeper risk assessment would require reviewing past performance data and the detailed contract statement of work.

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: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

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: $12,709,500

Exercised Options: $12,709,500

Current Obligation: $12,709,500

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline