Vertex Aerospace LLC awarded $187M for aircraft maintenance and logistics, with a significant portion allocated to Mississippi

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $187,180,022 ($187.2M)

Contractor: Vertex Aerospace LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-10-01

End Date: 2020-12-31

Contract Duration: 457 days

Daily Burn Rate: $409.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF T-45 U.S.N. AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE AND LOGISTICS SUPPORT (CLS)

Place of Performance

Location: MADISON, MADISON County, MISSISSIPPI, 39110

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $187.2 million to VERTEX AEROSPACE LLC for work described as: IGF T-45 U.S.N. AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE AND LOGISTICS SUPPORT (CLS) Key points: 1. Contract value represents a substantial investment in aviation support services. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding process for this award. 3. Performance context is critical given the nature of aircraft maintenance and logistics. 4. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader defense aviation support industry. 5. Risk indicators may include supply chain dependencies and technical expertise requirements.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $187 million for aircraft maintenance and logistics support appears reasonable within the defense sector. Benchmarking against similar contracts for aviation support services would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The 'COST NO FEE' contract type suggests that the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs, with no additional fee, which can be a cost-effective structure if managed properly. However, detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to industry standards are needed for a definitive value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This approach generally fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and service quality. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation implies a robust competition was sought. This method is designed to ensure the government receives the best possible value by leveraging market forces.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices and a wider range of innovative solutions being considered, leading to more efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The U.S. Navy benefits from enhanced aircraft maintenance and logistics capabilities. Services delivered include critical support for aircraft operational readiness. Geographic impact is noted with a significant portion of the contract value associated with Mississippi. Workforce implications include potential job creation and demand for skilled aviation technicians in the supported regions.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if not managed closely under the 'COST NO FEE' structure.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical maintenance could pose supply chain risks.
Ensuring consistent quality and timely delivery of services is paramount for operational readiness.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
The contract duration of over a year indicates a stable support arrangement.
Focus on essential aircraft maintenance and logistics directly supports military readiness.

Sector Analysis

The defense aviation maintenance and logistics sector is a critical component of national security, involving specialized services for military aircraft. This contract fits within the broader market for aerospace support services, which is characterized by high technical requirements and significant government spending. Comparable spending benchmarks in this sector often run into hundreds of millions of dollars annually for large-scale support contracts, reflecting the complexity and importance of maintaining military aviation assets.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication of small business set-asides for this specific contract, as it was awarded under full and open competition. The prime contractor, Vertex Aerospace LLC, will be responsible for managing the subcontracting opportunities. The impact on the small business ecosystem will depend on Vertex Aerospace's subcontracting strategy, potentially offering opportunities for specialized aviation support firms if they are engaged.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms and conditions, including performance metrics and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed operational performance data may be considered sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance Services
Logistics Support Contracts
Defense Aviation Support
U.S. Navy Contracts
Aerospace Maintenance and Repair

Risk Flags

Cost Control Risk (CNF Contract)
Performance Quality Assurance
Supply Chain Dependency
Technical Expertise Verification

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $187.2 million to VERTEX AEROSPACE LLC. IGF T-45 U.S.N. AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE AND LOGISTICS SUPPORT (CLS)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is VERTEX AEROSPACE LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $187.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-10-01. End: 2020-12-31.

What is Vertex Aerospace LLC's track record with similar U.S. Navy aircraft maintenance contracts?

Vertex Aerospace LLC has a history of performing aviation support services for the U.S. military. While specific details on past Navy aircraft maintenance contracts of this exact scale are not provided in the summary data, the company's experience in the aerospace sector suggests a foundational capability. A deeper dive into their contract history, including performance reviews, past performance questionnaires, and any documented issues or successes on prior engagements, would be necessary to fully assess their track record for this specific type of work. This would involve reviewing federal procurement databases and potentially agency performance reports.

How does the awarded amount of $187 million compare to the estimated value or historical spending for similar aircraft maintenance and logistics support contracts?

The $187 million award for aircraft maintenance and logistics support is a significant sum, placing it within the mid-to-large range for such contracts. To benchmark its value, one would compare it against contracts for similar scope, duration, and aircraft types awarded by the U.S. Navy or other branches of the Department of Defense. Historical spending patterns for similar services can reveal whether this award is in line with market rates or represents a potential outlier. Factors such as the specific aircraft platforms supported, the level of service required (e.g., depot-level maintenance vs. line maintenance), and the geographic locations of service delivery all influence cost, making direct comparisons crucial for assessing value for money.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this contract, considering its nature and the 'COST NO FEE' contract type?

The primary risk indicators for this contract revolve around cost control and performance assurance. Under a 'COST NO FEE' (CNF) contract, the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred, but the contractor earns no fee. This structure can incentivize contractors to manage costs efficiently, but it also carries risks. If the contractor's cost estimation or management is poor, costs could escalate beyond initial expectations, even without a fee. Risks also include potential quality issues if cost-saving measures compromise maintenance standards, supply chain disruptions affecting parts availability, and ensuring the contractor possesses the necessary technical expertise and certifications for the specific aircraft. Furthermore, the government bears the risk of cost overruns if not adequately monitored.

How effective are the oversight mechanisms for ensuring the performance and accountability of Vertex Aerospace LLC on this contract?

The effectiveness of oversight mechanisms hinges on the diligence of the contracting officer and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). DCMA typically provides on-site support, monitoring contractor performance, verifying costs, and ensuring compliance with contract terms. For a CNF contract, rigorous oversight is essential to validate the allowability and reasonableness of costs claimed by the contractor. Accountability is enforced through contract clauses that may allow for corrective actions, penalties, or termination for non-performance. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting requirements and the availability of award data, but the depth of operational oversight effectiveness is often internal to the agency and contractor relationship.

What is the historical spending pattern for aircraft maintenance and logistics support within the U.S. Navy, and how does this contract fit into that trend?

The U.S. Navy historically spends billions of dollars annually on aircraft maintenance, repair, and logistics support, reflecting the large and complex nature of its aviation fleet. This spending is distributed across numerous contracts, varying in size, scope, and duration, and awarded to a range of prime contractors and subcontractors. This $187 million contract represents one component of that larger spending trend. Its specific fit depends on whether it supports a particular aircraft type, a specific fleet, or a specialized maintenance function. Analyzing trends would involve looking at the aggregate spending on similar services over several fiscal years to identify increases, decreases, or shifts in contracting strategies, such as a move towards performance-based logistics or increased use of sustainment contracts.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Support Activities for Air Transportation › Other Support Activities for Air Transportation

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N0001912R0001

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 555 INDUSTRIAL DR S, MADISON, MS, 39110

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $187,180,022

Exercised Options: $187,180,022

Current Obligation: $187,180,022

Actual Outlays: $44,403,594

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 74

Total Subaward Amount: $24,312,055

Contract Characteristics

Consolidated Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0001914D0011

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline