Sikorsky Support Services Inc. awarded $49.2M contract for T34 aircraft support, with a 2101-day duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $49,200,491 ($49.2M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Support Services Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-29

End Date: 2012-06-30

Contract Duration: 2,101 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: FY07 FIRST QUARTER FUNDING FOR THE T34 AIRCRAFT

Place of Performance

Location: PENSACOLA, ESCAMBIA County, FLORIDA, 32504

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $49.2 million to SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC for work described as: FY07 FIRST QUARTER FUNDING FOR THE T34 AIRCRAFT Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 3. The duration of 2101 days indicates a long-term need for T34 aircraft support. 4. The award was made by the Defense Contract Management Agency, part of the Department of Defense. 5. The contract is for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation', a critical component of military logistics.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data. The firm fixed-price structure is generally favorable for cost control, but the total value over 2101 days needs to be assessed against actual services rendered and market rates for similar aviation support. The raw dollar amount of $49.2 million spread over nearly six years suggests a moderate annual expenditure.

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. The number of bidders is not specified, but this procurement method generally fosters price discovery and allows the government to select the best value offer. The competitive nature should theoretically lead to more favorable pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense units relying on the T34 aircraft for their operations. Services delivered include essential support activities for air transportation, ensuring aircraft readiness and operational capability. The geographic impact is likely concentrated in areas where T34 aircraft are based or operated, with Florida noted as the state of award. Workforce implications include employment for personnel involved in aircraft maintenance, logistics, and support operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed price does not adequately account for unforeseen maintenance complexities over the long contract duration.
Risk of contractor performance degradation over the extended period, impacting aircraft availability and operational readiness.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract structure transfers cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process and potential for competitive pricing.
Long contract duration indicates a stable, long-term requirement, allowing for efficient resource planning.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on aviation support services. The market for such services is characterized by specialized technical expertise and stringent quality requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) for similar military platforms, considering factors like aircraft type, age, and operational tempo.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. As a large contract likely requiring significant resources and specialized capabilities, it may involve subcontracting opportunities. However, without further details on subcontracting plans or goals, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem remains unclear.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance with contract terms. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, which incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may be less publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

T34 Aircraft Procurement
Military Aircraft Maintenance Contracts
Air Transportation Support Services
Department of Defense Aviation Logistics

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of cost escalation or performance degradation.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Potential for unforeseen maintenance complexities over the contract term.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $49.2 million to SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC. FY07 FIRST QUARTER FUNDING FOR THE T34 AIRCRAFT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $49.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-29. End: 2012-06-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for T34 aircraft support by the Department of Defense?

Analyzing historical spending for T34 aircraft support requires accessing detailed procurement data over multiple fiscal years. This specific contract, valued at $49.2 million over approximately 6 years, represents a significant but potentially isolated expenditure. To understand the broader pattern, one would need to aggregate spending on similar support activities for the T34 fleet, including maintenance, repair, overhaul, and spare parts. Factors such as aircraft age, operational tempo, and fleet size directly influence these spending trends. Without access to a comprehensive historical database, it is difficult to establish a definitive spending pattern, but this contract suggests a sustained need for operational support.

How does the per-unit cost of support for the T34 compare to similar aircraft in the DoD inventory?

Determining the per-unit cost of support for the T34 requires breaking down the total contract value by the number of aircraft supported or the number of flight hours. The provided data does not specify the number of T34 aircraft involved or their operational tempo (e.g., flight hours per year). Therefore, a direct per-unit cost comparison is not feasible with the current information. To conduct such an analysis, one would need to identify comparable aircraft within the DoD inventory that have similar roles, complexity, and age profiles, and then compare their respective support contract costs, adjusted for factors like maintenance requirements and operational demands.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this T34 support contract?

Key performance indicators (KPIs) for aircraft support contracts typically focus on ensuring operational readiness and cost-effectiveness. For this T34 support contract, likely KPIs would include aircraft availability rates (percentage of time aircraft are mission-capable), response times for maintenance requests, turnaround times for repairs, and adherence to scheduled maintenance. Additionally, metrics related to the quality of work, such as the number of repeat defects or discrepancies, and compliance with safety and regulatory standards would be crucial. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract incentivizes the contractor to meet these performance standards efficiently.

What is Sikorsky Support Services Inc.'s track record with similar DoD aviation support contracts?

Sikorsky Support Services Inc., as a contractor, likely has a substantial track record in supporting various aviation platforms for the Department of Defense. To assess their specific performance on similar contracts, one would need to review their past performance evaluations, contract awards, and any reported issues or successes in providing maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) services for military aircraft. Information on their experience with fixed-wing aircraft, particularly those with comparable operational requirements to the T34, would be highly relevant. A review of federal procurement databases and past performance databases would provide insights into their reliability, technical capabilities, and ability to manage complex support agreements.

What are the potential risks associated with the long duration (2101 days) of this contract?

The extended duration of 2101 days (approximately 5.8 years) for this T34 support contract presents several potential risks. Firstly, the firm fixed-price nature, while beneficial for cost certainty, could become disadvantageous if unforeseen technological advancements or significant increases in the cost of parts and labor occur over the contract period. The contractor might face challenges in accurately forecasting these costs. Secondly, maintaining consistent performance quality and contractor engagement over such a long period can be difficult. There's a risk of performance degradation or complacency. Lastly, the government's requirements might evolve, necessitating contract modifications which could introduce complexities and potential cost increases if not managed carefully.

How does the competition level (full and open) impact the pricing and value received by the government for this contract?

A 'full and open competition' award signifies that the government solicited bids from all eligible and responsible sources, fostering a competitive environment. This typically leads to more competitive pricing as contractors vie for the contract by offering their best terms. The government benefits from this by potentially securing lower prices than they might under sole-source or limited competition scenarios. Furthermore, the competitive process allows the government to evaluate not just price but also technical capabilities and past performance, aiming to achieve the best overall value. The presence of multiple bidders increases the likelihood that the selected offer represents a fair market price for the required services.

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

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: RTX Corp (UEI: 001344142)

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $49,200,491

Exercised Options: $49,200,491

Current Obligation: $49,200,491

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0001906D0017

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline