Army awards $190M for advanced tank automotive technology development to Concurrent Technologies Corp

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,374,494 ($19.4M)

Contractor: Concurrent Technologies Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-06-03

End Date: 2015-03-31

Contract Duration: 3,588 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200509!007222!2100!W56HZV!TACOM - WARREN !W56HZV05C0414 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050603!20080530!189737810!189737810!189737810!N!CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPOR!100 CTC DR !JOHNSTOWN !PA!15904!38288!021!42!JOHNSTOWN !CAMBRIA !PENN !+000000640000!N!N!000000000000!AC43!RDTE/TANK - AUTOMOTIVE-ADV TECH DEV !A4A!COMBAT VEHICLES !000 !* !541710!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !N!Z!D!N!U!1!001!N!1C!Z!Y!Z! ! !N!Z!N! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: JOHNSTOWN, CAMBRIA County, PENNSYLVANIA, 15904

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.4 million to CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP for work described as: 200509!007222!2100!W56HZV!TACOM - WARREN !W56HZV05C0414 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050603!20080530!189737810!189737810!189737810!N!CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPOR!100 CTC DR !JOHNSTOWN !PA!15904!38288!021!42!JOHNSTOWN !CAMB… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on research and development for advanced automotive technologies for combat vehicles. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about competition and potential for better pricing. 3. Long contract duration suggests a sustained need for specialized engineering services. 4. The award falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical area for defense modernization. 5. Performance context is tied to the Combat Vehicles portfolio, indicating strategic importance.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $190 million over its life cycle is substantial. Without comparable sole-source awards for similar advanced technology development, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the lack of competition inherently limits the government's ability to secure the most competitive pricing. Benchmarking against other R&D contracts in the defense sector for similar technological advancements would be necessary for a more robust evaluation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not openly competed. This approach is typically justified when only one responsible source can provide the required services or when urgency or specific technical expertise dictates such a path. The lack of multiple bidders means the government did not benefit from a competitive bidding process, which could have led to lower prices or more innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government does not have the leverage of multiple competing offers to drive down prices.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its Combat Vehicles programs. Services delivered include research and development for advanced automotive technologies. The geographic impact is primarily within Pennsylvania, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include employment for engineers and technical specialists at Concurrent Technologies Corp.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition.
Long contract duration may indicate potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly.
Focus on advanced R&D carries inherent technical risks.

Positive Signals

Contractor has a long-standing relationship with the government for similar services.
Focus on advanced technology development aligns with modernization goals.
Specific expertise of the contractor in tank automotive technology is likely a key factor.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically focusing on research and development for defense applications. The market for specialized defense R&D is often characterized by high barriers to entry due to technical expertise requirements and security clearances. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large R&D contracts awarded by the Department of Defense for advanced vehicle technologies or similar complex engineering solutions.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements in the provided data. As a sole-source award, the focus is on the prime contractor's capabilities. This contract does not appear to directly benefit the small business ecosystem through set-asides, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms would typically involve program management reviews, technical reviews, and financial audits conducted by the Department of the Army and potentially the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). Accountability measures are tied to the achievement of R&D milestones and deliverables outlined in the contract. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract awards are generally reported in federal procurement databases.

Related Government Programs

Advanced Ground Vehicle Systems
Combat Vehicle Modernization
Defense Research and Development
Automotive Engineering Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Long contract duration
Advanced technology R&D risks

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.4 million to CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP. 200509!007222!2100!W56HZV!TACOM - WARREN !W56HZV05C0414 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050603!20080530!189737810!189737810!189737810!N!CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORPOR!100 CTC DR !JOHNSTOWN !PA!15904!38288!021!42!JOHNSTOWN !CAMBRIA !PENN !+000000640000!N!N!000000000000!AC43!RDTE/TANK - AUTOMOTIVE-ADV TECH DEV !A4A!COMBAT VEHICLES !000 !* !541710!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CONCURRENT TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-06-03. End: 2015-03-31.

What is Concurrent Technologies Corporation's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in advanced automotive technology development?

Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) has a significant history of working with the Department of Defense, including the Army, on research and development initiatives. Their expertise often lies in areas such as advanced materials, vehicle survivability, and propulsion systems. The provided data indicates this specific contract (W56HZV05C0414) was awarded in 2005 and extended through 2015, suggesting a long-term engagement. Reviewing historical contract awards and performance reports for CTC would provide a more detailed understanding of their past performance, including on-time delivery, budget adherence, and technical success rates in similar R&D projects.

How does the $190 million contract value compare to similar sole-source R&D contracts for advanced automotive technology?

Benchmarking the $190 million value of this sole-source contract against similar sole-source R&D awards for advanced automotive technology is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of such contracts. Sole-source awards are, by definition, not subject to direct price competition. However, the magnitude of the award suggests a significant scope of work and a high level of specialized expertise required. To assess value, one would ideally compare it to other sole-source contracts for comparable technological advancements or, if possible, to competitively awarded contracts for similar R&D efforts to understand the potential price premium associated with a sole-source arrangement.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract for advanced technology development?

The primary risks associated with this sole-source contract include: 1. **Cost Overruns:** Without competitive pressure, there's a risk that costs could escalate beyond initial estimates if not rigorously managed. 2. **Limited Innovation:** A sole-source award might forgo potentially more innovative solutions that could have emerged from a competitive bidding process. 3. **Technical Risk:** Advanced R&D inherently carries technical risks; if the technology proves unfeasible or does not meet performance requirements, the investment may not yield the desired results. 4. **Contractor Lock-in:** The government may become dependent on the sole-source provider, making future transitions difficult or costly.

How effective has the Army been in leveraging R&D contracts like this to advance its combat vehicle capabilities historically?

The Army has historically leveraged R&D contracts to drive innovation and modernization in its combat vehicle fleet. Programs like the development of advanced armor, improved engine technologies, and enhanced sensor systems have often originated from such research initiatives. The success of these contracts is measured by their contribution to fielding more capable, survivable, and effective ground vehicles. While specific outcomes for this particular contract require detailed analysis of its deliverables and their subsequent integration into Army programs, the long duration and substantial funding suggest a strategic investment aimed at significant technological advancement.

What has been the historical spending trend for engineering services related to combat vehicles within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending on engineering services for combat vehicles within the Department of the Army has generally been substantial, reflecting the complexity and ongoing need for modernization of these platforms. This spending fluctuates based on strategic priorities, budget allocations, and the lifecycle of various vehicle programs. Contracts for R&D, upgrades, and sustainment engineering are common. Analyzing aggregated spending data for the relevant NAICS codes (like 541330 - Engineering Services) and specific program elements related to combat vehicles over several fiscal years would reveal trends, identify major contractors, and highlight periods of increased investment in this domain.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 100 CTC DR, JOHNSTOWN, PA, 15904

Business Categories: Category Business, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline