DoD's $134M Flight School Training Support Contract Awarded to General Dynamics IT

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $134,384,655 ($134.4M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-04-01

End Date: 2025-03-31

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $369.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: LOT YEAR II TASK ORDER BEING ISSUED IN SUPPORT OF FLIGHT SCHOOL TRAINING SUPPORT SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: DALEVILLE, DALE County, ALABAMA, 36322

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $134.4 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: LOT YEAR II TASK ORDER BEING ISSUED IN SUPPORT OF FLIGHT SCHOOL TRAINING SUPPORT SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in military aviation readiness. 2. General Dynamics IT's selection suggests a competitive process, but details on bidder numbers are needed. 3. Performance risk appears moderate given the nature of training support services. 4. This contract aligns with broader DoD efforts to modernize training infrastructure. 5. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the government. 6. Geographic concentration in Alabama warrants attention for regional economic impact.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of $134.4 million over one year for flight school training support services is substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale training support contracts within the DoD is crucial for a precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type suggests that cost control is a priority, with the contractor bearing the risk of cost overruns. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for similar services, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging.

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 offers. This approach generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and service quality. However, the specific number of bidders and the evaluation criteria used are not detailed here. A higher number of bidders typically suggests stronger price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is favorable for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through robust bidding. It ensures that the government is not limited to a single provider, thereby encouraging competitive pricing and innovation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its flight school trainees, who will receive enhanced support services. Services delivered include essential support functions for flight training operations, ensuring readiness and efficiency. The contract's geographic impact is concentrated in Alabama, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the region. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for support staff, instructors, and administrative personnel within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The defense training sector is a critical component of national security, encompassing a wide range of services from simulation to operational readiness support. This contract falls within the broader 'Other Support Services' category, which is a significant market for government contractors. The total addressable market for defense training services is substantial, with ongoing investments driven by evolving threats and technological advancements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale training support contracts awarded by the DoD and its branches.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a primary set-aside criterion for this specific award. While General Dynamics IT is a large prime contractor, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors. The extent of subcontracting to small businesses will be a key factor in assessing the contract's impact on the small business ecosystem. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting goals were established and met.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Army contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are typically embedded within the contract's performance work statement (PWS), with defined deliverables and quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs). Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics and oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-the-army, training-support, general-dynamics-it, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, alabama, large-contract, aviation-training, support-services

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $134.4 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC.. LOT YEAR II TASK ORDER BEING ISSUED IN SUPPORT OF FLIGHT SCHOOL TRAINING SUPPORT SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $134.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-04-01. End: 2025-03-31.

What is General Dynamics Information Technology's track record with similar large-scale training support contracts for the Department of Defense?

General Dynamics Information Technology (GDIT) has a long history of supporting the Department of Defense across various service domains, including IT, logistics, and training support. They have previously held significant contracts for complex military training programs, often involving large dollar values and extended performance periods. Analyzing GDIT's past performance on similar contracts would involve reviewing contract award histories, performance evaluations (if publicly available), and any documented instances of contract modifications, disputes, or successful program completions. Their experience suggests a capacity to manage large, complex service delivery requirements, but a detailed review of specific past training support contracts would be necessary to fully assess their suitability and historical success rate in this particular niche.

How does the $134.4 million contract value compare to historical spending on flight school training support by the Department of the Army?

The $134.4 million contract value represents a significant annual investment in flight school training support services for the Department of the Army. To benchmark this against historical spending, one would need to examine prior fiscal years' expenditures on similar training support contracts. This would involve querying federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) for contracts with comparable service descriptions (e.g., flight training support, aviation maintenance support, simulation services) awarded to the Army or its aviation branches. Analyzing trends in annual spending, average contract values, and the number of awarded contracts over time would provide context. A sudden increase or decrease in spending could indicate shifts in training priorities, budget allocations, or the adoption of new training methodologies.

What are the primary performance risks associated with this flight school training support contract, and how are they mitigated?

Primary performance risks for a flight school training support contract include potential disruptions to training schedules due to contractor-related issues (e.g., personnel shortages, equipment failures), failure to meet required training standards or safety protocols, and challenges in adapting to evolving training requirements or technologies. Mitigation strategies typically involve a robust Performance Work Statement (PWS) clearly defining requirements and performance standards, a comprehensive Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) to monitor contractor performance, and the use of incentives or penalties tied to performance outcomes. The firm-fixed-price contract type also shifts some financial risk to the contractor. Regular communication and collaboration between the government and the contractor are essential for proactive risk management and issue resolution.

What is the expected impact of this contract on the readiness and effectiveness of Army aviation personnel?

This contract is expected to have a positive impact on the readiness and effectiveness of Army aviation personnel by ensuring the consistent and high-quality delivery of essential training support services. Reliable support for flight schools means that training pipelines can operate efficiently, allowing more aviators to complete their training on schedule. This includes ensuring that training facilities are operational, simulators are functional, administrative support is in place, and potentially even direct support for instructors or training curriculum. By outsourcing these support functions to a specialized contractor like General Dynamics IT, the Army can focus its organic resources on core aviation training and combat readiness missions, ultimately contributing to a more skilled and prepared aviation force.

How does the concentration of this contract in Alabama affect the regional economy and workforce?

The award of a $134.4 million contract to General Dynamics IT, with services likely performed in Alabama (based on the 'st': 'AL', 'sn': 'ALABAMA' fields), is expected to have a significant positive impact on the regional economy and workforce. This includes the direct creation of jobs within GDIT's operations in Alabama, encompassing roles such as program management, administrative support, technical specialists, and potentially instructors or training facilitators. Furthermore, the contract can stimulate indirect economic activity through local procurement of goods and services by GDIT and its subcontractors, as well as increased spending by employees in the local economy. This influx of federal spending can bolster the state's defense contracting sector and contribute to overall economic growth.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesOther Support ServicesAll Other Support Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W900KK22R0003

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp

Address: 3150 FAIRVIEW PARK DR STE 100, FALLS CHURCH, VA, 22042

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $134,384,655

Exercised Options: $134,384,655

Current Obligation: $134,384,655

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 5

Total Subaward Amount: $93,264,056

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W900KK23D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2024-04-01

Current End Date: 2025-03-31

Potential End Date: 2025-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-08-14

More Contracts from General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc.

View all General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending