• About
          • About - ARDAK's legacy and SIGNIFICANT differentiator, ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) Competitive Intelligence Tool Comprises of Modules that can be licensed to meet your unique needs

    • Partners and Affiliations
          • Partners & Affiliations - ARDAK has been an active member in the GovCon / Aerospace and Defense (A&D) Industry for 35 + years

    • Rate Derivation (RD) Methodology
          • RD Indirect Rate Methodology - ARDAK’s Wrap Rate Methodology was used to develop the most sophisticated Wrap Rate Intellectual Property (IP) in the industry.  While emulated by our competitors ONLY ARDAK has 35 + years of continuous Wrap Rate IP enhancements, and every analyst has a minimum of 20 years’ experience using ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD Summary
          • RD Summary - A TOP DOWN estimates of the Wrap Rate Derivation (multiple of Fringe, Overhead, and G&A, without regard to Fee or Material Handling costs) are maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD HIGH Level Decomposition
          • RD HIGH Level Decomposition - A TOP DOWN HIGH Level Wrap Rate Decomposition consisting of the estimated Fringe, Overhead and G&A for both plant and site operations are maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD LOW Level Decomposition
          • RD LOW Level Decomposition - A BOTTOM Up LOW Level Wrap Rate Decomposition consisting of 23 DESCRETE ELEMENTS of Fringe, Overhead and G&A and Relative Competitiveness (High, Low, Mean, Standard Deviation) to the Market Sector at the element level are maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD LOW Level ELEMENT Descriptions
          • RD LOW Level ELEMENT Descriptions - 23 DISCRETE ELEMENTS of Fringe, Overhead, and G&A are defined and normalized within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD Price To Win (PTW) Trending
          • RD Price To Win Trending - Proprietary PTW algorithms are applied to 23 DISCRETE ELEMENTS of Fringe, Overhead, and G&A for each procurement class developed (Priority, Must Win, and Strategic) PWIN Rates are maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD PREDICTIVE Rate Derivations
          • RD PREDICTIVE Summary - Several Wrap Rate Predictive Models including UNPOPULATED JV’s, Notional, Pro Forma, and other custom modifications to a competitor's cost basis are maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • RD Competitor Target Acquisition
          • RD Competitor Target Acquisition - Utilizing ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) Target Acquisition Functionality, ARDAK will validate or suggest the Competitor Cost Center target that has the lowest Wrap Rate, domain expertise, and Customer past performance deemed to be the most Significant Competitive Threat

    • RD's and ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)
          • RD's and ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) - Widely Recognized as the GOLD STANDARD, and the “Standard & Poor’s” of Indirect / Wrap Rate Analysis with in the A&D Industry

    • Market Based Affordability (MBA)
          • Market Based Affordability (MBA) - Since the 2008 Financial Crisis, ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) was utilized for dozens of MBA Analyses relative to specific Market Sectors for the largest A&D Contractors in the world

    • Service Centric PTW
          • Service Centric PTW - Service Centric PTW Opportunities are those that involve very little or no material, custom solution, or platform development, and are predominately labor based and utilizes ARDAK's RATE TO WIN (RTW) Models

    • Platform / Solution Centric PTW
          • Platform / Solution Centric - Platform / Solution Centric PTW opportunities are those that involve a customized solution such as a weapon system and typically leverages one or more of ARDAK’s Proprietary Cost Models

    • EMMARS PTW Use Case
          • EMMARS PTW Use Case - See an example of  a Platform / Solution based PTW utilizing ARDAK's Proprietary Cost Models

    • Portfolio Analysis
          • Portfolio Analysis - Validate, Optimize, Expand, Realign, and Develop a Go To Market Strategy utilizing ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • Market Analysis
          • Market Analysis - Staying on top of changing markets requires Competitive Intelligence. By utilizing ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) Market Analysis is your basis for making sound decisions about where to utilize your resources now and in the future

    • Market Based Affordability (MBA)
          • Market Based Affordability (MBA) - Since the 2008 Financial Crisis, ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) was utilized for dozens of MBA Analyses relative to specific Market Sectors for the largest A&D Contractors in the world

    • Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A’s)
          • Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A's) - ARDAK has supported $Billions of M&A's including candidate Identification, Review, Screening, Market Participation, Customer Base, and Programs utilizing ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • Competitor Assessment
          • Competitive Assessments – A deep utilizing ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) delivering Competitive Posture, Recent Wins & Losses, Operating Segments, Financial Performance, M&A's, Reliance on Government & Commercial Business, Leading Customers, Products & Services, Contracts, and Contract Types

    • Agency Analysis
          • Agency Analysis A deep utilizing ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) providing significant visibility into Agency's Leading Competitors, Products & Services, Contracts, and Contract Types

    • Rate Derivation (RD) RD Summary
          • RD Summary - A TOP DOWN estimates of the Wrap Rate Derivation (multiple of Fringe, Overhead, and G&A, without regard to Fee or Material Handling costs) are maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • Direct Labor (DL) Rate Analysis
          • Direct Labor (DL) Rate Category and Analysis – Thousands of LCATs by Title, Description, Years of Experience, Educational, Clearance Requirements, and Geographic Location are stored and maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • Material Handling (MH) Analysis
          • Material Handling (MH) Analysis –An assessment of the competitor’s Material & Handling by burdening policy (Value Added, Fixed Costs, Direct Material, Other Material, etc.) and estimated burden rate are stored and maintained within ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • Fee Analysis
          • Fee Analysis – Scrubbed contract actions stored in ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES) are analyzed to estimate a competitor’s Fee structure.  The operating margin is calculated and a comparative analysis is then performed to validate the Fee which is then stored in ACES

    • A&D Cost Models
          • A&D Cost Models - ARDAK maintains dozens of proprietary cost models relative to specific sectors such Fixed Wing, Rotary Win, Limited Initial Rate Production (LRIP), Full Rate Production (FPR), and Full Life Cycle Costs

    • Government Agencies ($100B+ PTW WINS)
          • Government Agencies – Price To Win (PTW) Past Performance by Government Agency ALL utilized ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

    • Use Cases
          • Use Cases - Price To Win (PTW) Past Performance by Use Case ALL utilized ARDAK's Contract Exploitation System (ACES)

  • News & Insights
  • Contact Us
WW Humble Supporters

Contractor Cost Containment Initiative

Purpose

Utilizing ARDAK’s Contract Exploitation System (ACES), ARDAK provided select government agencies objectively documented analysis, comparison of alternatives and recommendations to address rampant contractor cost increases on cost reimbursable procurements. Cost containment is mandatory for ALL Agencies to accurately develop Budget Estimate Submissions (BES) to the DoD, and is critical to receive favorable resource allocation reviews through the DoD’s Program Objectives Memorandums (POM), and most importantly to fulfil the mission.

Problem Statement

Most Source Selection Committees (SCC) DO NOT currently maintain relevant analytics, matrices, and industry standard benchmarks from commercially available sources on Aerospace and Defense (A&D) contractors to develop and integrate stringent cost containment procedures into the source selection methodology and evaluation process. In the absence of benchmarking analytics A&D contractors submit DCAA approved indirect or “wrap rates” to government agencies on cost reimbursable contracts that may be non-competitive when compared to ARDAK’s Contract Exploitation System (ACES) benchmarking analytics within specific market sectors e.g. Logistics, Professional / Technical Services, Maintenance Repair Overhaul and Upgrade (MROU), etc. Should SCC’s continue to evaluate cost reimbursable contracts without the benefit of recent industry standard relative cost containment benchmarking analytics contractor cost reduction and continuous improvement requirements cannot be developed, cost containment goals are difficult to set, and are even more difficult to achieve.

Background and Context

Contractors submit indirect or “wrap rates” and direct labor rates to government agencies for cost reimbursement. Up to 65% of the wrap may be Fringe alone, which many contractors use to their advantage e.g. Affordable Care Act / Obama Care to justify increased Fringe expenses and therefore increased costs. While on the surface industry or market conditions with regard to health care and other factors may seem reasonable, without having specific industry benchmarking analytics to validate, contrast and compare, SCCs are at a distinct disadvantage when determining Rate Reasonableness or Fair and Reasonable Price Determination.

Pilot Initiative Description

ARDAK developed Unsolicited Proposals to select agencies so that SCCs may integrate industry standard direct and indirect benchmarking analytics within their source selection methodology. In addition to providing industry standard metrics, ARDAK purposed providing the resources necessary to fully integrate ARDAK’s Contract Exploitation System (ACES) within the existing source selection methodology. Additionally, ARDAK made recommendations so that agencies may improve its source selection methodology by fully leveraging ACES Agencies will realize the cost savings by holding contractors accountable to industry standard benchmarks within the first three months of integrating ACES within the SCC’s current methodology utilizing a twofold approach, 1) Horizontally across agency’s historical contract basis, and 2) Vertically by Major Programs. The horizontal approach provides parametric analytics within two of the largest sectors and provides immediate access to ACES. The vertical approach, on a program by program, basis provides the time to adopt the methodology across differing acquisition strategies, requirements, schedules, and SCCs.

Benefits

The Army Sustainment Command / Army Contracting Command – Rock Island (ASC/ACC-RI) could leverage ARDAK’s baseline Indirect Rates or “Cost Basis Wrap Rates” and then apply “Must Win” Wrap Rates for Rate Reasonableness guidance. By integrating ARDAK’s Contract Exploitation System (ACES) within ASC-RI’s Source Selection Methodology, ARDAK conservatively estimates an annual cost savings of between $102,112,000 and $132,847,000 will be realized by the ASC-RI.