Biomedical research contract awarded to University of Washington for over $32.6 million, spanning 16 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $32,666,124 ($32.7M)

Contractor: University of Washington

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 1999-01-13

End Date: 2015-08-15

Contract Duration: 6,058 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: BIOMEDICAL (BASIC)

Place of Performance

Location: SEATTLE, KING County, WASHINGTON, 98195

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $32.7 million to UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON for work described as: BIOMEDICAL (BASIC) Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a long-term, complex research endeavor. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. Long contract duration (over 16 years) may indicate a stable, ongoing research need. 4. The nature of basic biomedical research often involves inherent uncertainties and evolving objectives. 5. This contract falls within the broad category of health and human services research. 6. The award was made by the National Institutes of Health, a leading biomedical research agency.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

Benchmarking the value of basic biomedical research contracts is challenging due to the inherent variability in research scope and outcomes. However, a 16-year duration for a contract exceeding $32 million suggests a sustained investment in a specific research area. Without comparable long-term projects of identical scope, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult, but the duration implies a recognized and ongoing need for the research conducted by the University of Washington.

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 presence of two bids suggests a degree of competition, though the exact number of interested parties and the rigor of the evaluation process are not detailed. Full and open competition is generally expected to yield competitive pricing and identify the most capable offeror.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from the assurance that the contract was awarded through a process designed to identify the best value and potentially the most cost-effective solution available in the market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the scientific community and the public, through advancements in biomedical knowledge. Services delivered include fundamental research in a biomedical field, contributing to a deeper understanding of biological processes. The geographic impact is primarily within Washington state, where the University of Washington is located, but the research findings have national and global implications. Workforce implications include support for researchers, technicians, and administrative staff at the University of Washington.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration could lead to potential scope creep or a decrease in urgency if not actively managed.
The 'Cost No Fee' contract type might incentivize cost accumulation if not rigorously monitored for efficiency.
Basic research outcomes are inherently uncertain, making it difficult to predict specific deliverables or timelines.
Reliance on a single institution for such a long period could limit exposure to alternative research methodologies or findings.

Positive Signals

Awarding to a reputable university like the University of Washington suggests a strong track record in research.
The 'Cost No Fee' structure, while requiring oversight, can be appropriate for research where outcomes are not precisely predictable.
The long duration indicates a sustained commitment to a research area deemed important by the funding agency.
Full and open competition provides a baseline for ensuring a fair and transparent award process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader 'Biomedical (Basic)' sector, a critical area of federal spending focused on foundational scientific inquiry. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the primary federal agency funding such research, with annual budgets in the tens of billions. Comparable spending involves numerous grants and contracts awarded to universities and research institutions nationwide for a wide array of health-related scientific investigations. The market for basic biomedical research is characterized by highly specialized institutions and a competitive grant application process.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have specific small business set-aside provisions, as indicated by 'sb: false'. The University of Washington, as the prime contractor, is a large research institution. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses would depend on the specific needs and procurement practices of the university for this project, but there is no explicit requirement or indication of such focus within the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). As a 'Cost No Fee' contract, rigorous financial oversight and review of research progress reports would be essential to ensure accountability and responsible use of funds. Transparency is typically managed through public dissemination of research findings via publications and presentations, and adherence to NIH's research integrity policies. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

National Institutes of Health Research Grants
Biomedical Research and Development
University Research Partnerships
Basic Science Funding

Risk Flags

Long contract duration
Cost-reimbursement contract type (Cost No Fee)
Basic research with inherent uncertainty

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $32.7 million to UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON. BIOMEDICAL (BASIC)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (National Institutes of Health).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $32.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-01-13. End: 2015-08-15.

What is the University of Washington's track record with NIH contracts of similar scope and duration?

The University of Washington is a major recipient of federal research funding, particularly from the NIH. While specific details on their track record for contracts of this exact scope and 16-year duration are not provided in this data snippet, the university consistently ranks among the top institutions for NIH funding. Their extensive experience in managing large-scale, long-term research projects suggests a capacity to handle complex biomedical research endeavors. Further analysis would involve examining their historical performance metrics, publication records, and any documented issues or successes on prior NIH awards to fully assess their track record for this specific contract.

How does the total contract value of $32.6 million compare to typical long-term biomedical research projects?

The total contract value of $32.6 million over approximately 16 years, averaging around $2 million per year, is within the range for significant, long-term basic biomedical research projects. Large-scale research initiatives at major universities often receive substantial funding to support personnel, equipment, and ongoing studies. While 'typical' is hard to define due to the diverse nature of research, this figure suggests a substantial investment in a specific area of inquiry. Benchmarking would require comparing it to other NIH-funded projects of similar duration and scientific focus, considering factors like the number of researchers involved and the complexity of the research questions being addressed.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Cost No Fee' contract for basic research?

The primary risks associated with a 'Cost No Fee' contract for basic research revolve around cost control and the potential for inefficient resource utilization. Since the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs without an additional profit margin, there can be less inherent incentive to minimize expenses. This necessitates robust oversight from the contracting agency (NIH in this case) to ensure that costs are reasonable, allocable, and necessary for the research. Another risk is that the lack of a direct profit motive might, in some cases, reduce the contractor's drive for innovation or efficiency, although this is often mitigated by the academic institution's reputation and pursuit of scientific advancement. Effective monitoring of expenditures and research progress is crucial to mitigate these risks.

How effective is 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for taxpayer money in basic research contracts?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money, even in basic research. It allows a wide range of qualified entities to propose solutions, fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation. For basic research, where outcomes are uncertain, competition helps identify the most promising research approaches and the most capable institutions to execute them. While the 'best value' in research may not always be solely price-driven, competition ensures that proposals are evaluated against established criteria, including scientific merit, feasibility, and institutional capacity. The NIH's rigorous peer-review process, combined with competitive solicitations, aims to maximize the return on investment for public funds in scientific discovery.

What are the implications of the contract's long duration (16 years) on program effectiveness and adaptability?

A 16-year duration for a basic biomedical research contract implies a long-term commitment to a particular scientific area, which can be highly beneficial for achieving significant breakthroughs that require sustained effort. It allows for deep exploration of complex biological questions and the development of specialized expertise and infrastructure. However, it also presents challenges related to adaptability. Scientific fields evolve rapidly, and research priorities can shift. A very long contract duration might risk locking in funding for approaches that become outdated or less promising over time. Effective program management, including periodic reviews and potential for mid-course corrections or re-competitions, is crucial to ensure the program remains relevant and effective throughout its extended lifespan.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: GERBERDING HALL, RM 280, BOX 351248, SEATTLE, WA, 98195

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $42,197,189

Exercised Options: $32,666,124

Current Obligation: $32,666,124

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline