DoD's $40.6M R&D contract with Mississippi State University shows strong performance signals

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $40,663,049 ($40.7M)

Contractor: Mississippi State University

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2017-05-31

End Date: 2026-01-13

Contract Duration: 3,149 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: MISSISSIPPI STATE, OKTIBBEHA County, MISSISSIPPI, 39762

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $40.7 million to MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Performance is rated as excellent, indicating high satisfaction with the contractor's delivery. 3. The contract type is Cost No Fee, which shifts risk to the contractor. 4. Long duration of over 3,000 days suggests a complex, long-term research endeavor. 5. The NAICS code points to research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences. 6. The contract is a definitive contract, typically used for complex procurements.

Value Assessment

Rating: excellent

The contract's excellent performance rating suggests strong value for money, especially given the Cost No Fee structure which incentivizes contractor efficiency. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts is challenging without more specific service details, but the high rating implies successful achievement of research objectives. The absence of fee indicates that the contractor's compensation is primarily for costs incurred, with no profit margin built in, further enhancing potential value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The number of bidders is not specified, but this method generally fosters price discovery and allows the government to select the best value offering. The competitive nature of the award process is a positive indicator for achieving fair market pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging high-quality service delivery.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, which receives advanced research and development services. The contract supports advancements in physical, engineering, and life sciences, potentially leading to new technologies or improved defense capabilities. The geographic impact is centered in Mississippi, supporting a key research institution. The contract likely involves highly skilled researchers and scientists, contributing to the specialized workforce in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if research proves more complex than anticipated, though the Cost No Fee structure mitigates this.
Long-term nature of the contract could lead to scope creep if not managed carefully.

Positive Signals

Excellent performance rating indicates successful execution and high-quality research output.
Cost No Fee contract structure places financial risk on the contractor, aligning incentives with cost control.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process and potential for competitive pricing.
Long contract duration allows for in-depth research and development.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This is a critical area for defense innovation. Comparable spending in this sector can vary widely based on the specific research area, but significant government investment is typical for advanced R&D initiatives aimed at maintaining technological superiority.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside. However, the prime contractor, Mississippi State University, may engage small businesses as subcontractors if their expertise is required for specific research tasks, though this is not explicitly detailed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the Department of the Army. Performance monitoring, financial reviews, and adherence to research milestones would be key oversight mechanisms. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting systems, though specific details of research progress may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Research and Development Programs
University Research Partnerships
Advanced Technology Development Contracts

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may lead to outdated research or scope creep.
Cost No Fee structure places all financial risk on the contractor, requiring careful management.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $40.7 million to MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY. IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $40.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-05-31. End: 2026-01-13.

What is the track record of Mississippi State University in securing and performing on large federal research contracts?

Mississippi State University (MSU) has a significant history of engaging in federal research, particularly with agencies like the Department of Defense. As a major research institution, MSU frequently competes for and wins large-scale grants and contracts. Their performance on such contracts is generally well-regarded, evidenced by their ability to secure substantial funding and maintain long-term relationships with government sponsors. The 'excellent' rating on this specific contract further supports a positive track record. However, a deeper analysis would involve reviewing performance metrics across multiple contracts, including any past issues or commendations, to provide a comprehensive view of their capabilities and reliability as a federal contractor.

How does the Cost No Fee (CNF) contract type impact the value proposition for the government compared to other contract types?

The Cost No Fee (CNF) contract type is highly advantageous for the government in research and development scenarios where the scope is inherently uncertain and innovation is the primary goal. In a CNF contract, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs but receives no fee or profit. This structure places the entire financial risk on the contractor, incentivizing them to manage costs extremely efficiently and to achieve the research objectives within the allocated budget. For the government, this means the total expenditure is limited to the actual costs incurred, potentially leading to significant savings compared to cost-plus-fee contracts where profit is added. The 'excellent' performance rating on this contract suggests that MSU effectively managed costs while delivering high-quality research, maximizing the value derived from this contract type.

What are the potential risks associated with the long duration (3149 days) of this research contract?

The extended duration of this contract, spanning over 8 years, presents several potential risks. Firstly, the rapidly evolving nature of research and technology means that the initial research objectives or methodologies might become outdated before the contract concludes. This could necessitate costly modifications or lead to research that is no longer relevant. Secondly, long-term contracts increase the possibility of personnel turnover within the contractor's team, potentially disrupting institutional knowledge and project continuity. Thirdly, there's a risk of scope creep, where the project's objectives may expand beyond the original intent, leading to unforeseen cost increases (though mitigated by the CNF structure) or delays. Finally, maintaining consistent oversight and engagement from the government over such a long period can be challenging.

How does the specific research area (NAICS 541712) typically compare in terms of spending and competition within the federal R&D landscape?

NAICS code 541712, 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology),' represents a broad and highly active category within federal R&D spending. Agencies like the Department of Defense, National Science Foundation, and Department of Energy invest heavily in this area due to its critical role in national security, technological advancement, and economic competitiveness. Competition within this sector is typically high, as numerous universities, research institutions, and private companies possess the expertise to bid on these contracts. The total federal spending in this category runs into billions of dollars annually. Contracts can range from fundamental research to applied development, influencing the specific nature of competition and the value benchmarks.

What does the 'excellent' performance rating signify in the context of this specific R&D contract?

An 'excellent' performance rating on this contract signifies that Mississippi State University has exceeded expectations in fulfilling the contract's requirements. For a research and development contract, this typically means the contractor has not only met but surpassed the technical objectives, delivered high-quality research findings, adhered to timelines and budgets (especially critical in a CNF contract), and demonstrated exceptional responsiveness and collaboration with the government. It suggests that the research conducted is of significant value, potentially leading to breakthroughs or advancements that strongly align with the Department of the Army's strategic goals. This rating provides strong assurance to the government regarding the contractor's capabilities and the successful utilization of taxpayer funds.

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 › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W56HZV16R0099

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 245 BARR AVE MCARTHUR HALL, MISSISSIPPI STATE, MS, 39762

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Government, Higher Education, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Public), U.S. Regional/State Government

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $40,663,049

Exercised Options: $40,663,049

Current Obligation: $40,663,049

Actual Outlays: $1,384,993

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 5

Total Subaward Amount: $6,981,228

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline