DoD's $30M Sikorsky contract for flight operations support in Florida shows fair value with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,176,916 ($30.2M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Support Services Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-10-01

End Date: 2011-03-31

Contract Duration: 181 days

Daily Burn Rate: $166.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: FH GEN MNT

Place of Performance

Location: PENSACOLA, ESCAMBIA County, FLORIDA, 32504

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $30.2 million to SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC for work described as: FH GEN MNT Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the specialized nature of flight operations support. 2. Competition was limited, potentially impacting price discovery and taxpayer value. 3. Performance risk seems manageable due to the fixed-price contract type. 4. The contract duration of 181 days is relatively short, suggesting a focused scope. 5. This contract falls within the broader Defense sector's spending on aviation support services. 6. The award was a delivery order against a larger contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of approximately $30.18 million for 181 days of support suggests a daily rate of roughly $166,723. This rate, while substantial, is not inherently unreasonable for specialized flight operations support, which often involves high-skilled personnel, complex logistics, and significant overhead. Benchmarking against similar contracts for aviation support services would provide a more definitive assessment of value for money. However, given the fixed-price nature, the government has a defined cost ceiling.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely solicited. However, the data specifies only one award (no: 1), which could imply that while the competition was open, only one responsive bid was received or deemed the best value. The level of competition, even if open, needs further examination to understand if it truly drove competitive pricing or if other factors limited the number of viable participants.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible prices through a wide range of offers. However, if only one bid was truly viable, the intended price benefits of broad competition may not have been fully realized.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense units requiring flight operations support. Services delivered likely include aircrew support, aircraft maintenance coordination, and logistical planning for flight missions. The geographic impact is concentrated in Florida, supporting operations within that state. Workforce implications include the employment of specialized aviation support personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited number of actual bidders despite full and open competition could indicate market concentration or high barriers to entry.
Short contract duration might necessitate frequent re-competition, leading to administrative overhead and potential disruption.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting an effort to maximize market participation.
The contract is a delivery order, implying it's part of a larger, potentially pre-vetted framework.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader Defense sector, specifically supporting aviation operations. The market for specialized aviation support services is often characterized by a few key players due to the technical expertise and security clearances required. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining military readiness and operational capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other contracts for similar support services across different military branches or agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb: false) and set-asides (ss: false) were not factors in this specific award. This suggests the contract was not targeted towards small businesses, and there is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. The impact on the small business ecosystem is therefore likely minimal for this particular contract, unless the prime contractor has broader subcontracting initiatives not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. As a delivery order under a larger contract, the initial award and oversight mechanisms were likely established during the parent contract's lifecycle. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed performance metrics may be internal.

Related Government Programs

Defense Aviation Support Services
Military Flight Operations
Air Transportation Support
Logistics and Maintenance Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition despite open solicitation.
Potential for cost overruns if scope is not tightly managed, despite fixed price.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $30.2 million to SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC. FH GEN MNT

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 $30.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-10-01. End: 2011-03-31.

What is the track record of SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC with the Department of Defense?

SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC has a significant history of contracting with the Department of Defense, primarily related to aviation support and maintenance. Their awards often involve complex helicopter and aircraft support, reflecting their specialization in the aerospace industry. Analyzing their past performance ratings, any contract disputes, or modifications on previous DoD contracts would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and capability. A review of their contract history reveals numerous awards across various agencies, indicating a substantial presence and experience in serving government aviation needs. This specific contract, being a delivery order, suggests it leverages an existing relationship and established performance baseline.

How does the daily rate of $166,723 compare to similar flight operations support contracts?

The daily rate of approximately $166,723 for flight operations support is substantial and requires careful benchmarking. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts, a precise comparison is difficult. However, rates for specialized military support services, especially those involving complex aircraft, highly trained personnel, and potentially 24/7 operations, can range widely. Factors influencing this rate include the specific types of aircraft supported, the level of maintenance required, the complexity of logistical support, and the geographic location. If this rate is significantly higher than similar contracts for comparable services, it could indicate potential overpricing or unique contract requirements justifying the cost. Conversely, if it aligns with or is lower than market rates for similar specialized support, it suggests fair value.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract and how are they mitigated?

The primary risks associated with this contract likely revolve around performance and cost. Performance risks include potential delays in support, failure to meet operational requirements, or issues with personnel or equipment. Cost risks, while mitigated by the firm fixed-price structure, could still arise from unforeseen logistical challenges or scope creep if not managed tightly. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust oversight by the contracting agency (DCMA), clear performance standards and deliverables outlined in the contract, and potentially penalties for non-performance. The fixed-price nature itself is a key mitigation tool, transferring much of the cost overrun risk to the contractor. The short duration also limits the exposure to long-term performance issues.

What is the historical spending pattern for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' by the Department of Defense?

Historical spending patterns for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' by the Department of Defense are generally substantial, reflecting the continuous need for aviation readiness and operational support. This category often encompasses a wide range of services beyond direct aircraft procurement or maintenance, including ground support, flight planning, air traffic control coordination, and specialized operational assistance. Annual spending can fluctuate based on geopolitical events, military readiness levels, and specific program requirements. Analyzing trends over several fiscal years would reveal whether spending in this category is increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable, providing context for the significance of individual contract awards like this one.

What does the 'delivery order' (aw: DELIVERY ORDER) designation imply for this contract?

The 'delivery order' designation indicates that this contract is not a standalone award but rather a specific order placed against a previously established indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) or other type of basic contract. This implies that the foundational contract, including terms, conditions, and potentially pricing structures, was already competed and awarded. The delivery order then specifies the quantity, delivery schedule, and price for a particular requirement. This approach allows for flexibility and efficiency, enabling agencies to procure goods or services as needed without conducting a full competition for each individual requirement. It suggests that SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC likely held a broader contract vehicle with the DoD.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

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: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 06615

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,176,916

Exercised Options: $30,176,916

Current Obligation: $30,176,916

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0001906D0017

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline