NIH awards $19.3M for life sciences R&D to Institute for Systems Biology over 9 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,311,734 ($19.3M)

Contractor: Institute for Systems Biology

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2002-09-15

End Date: 2011-10-25

Contract Duration: 3,327 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: R&D

Place of Performance

Location: SEATTLE, KING County, WASHINGTON, 98105

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $19.3 million to INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value represents significant long-term investment in a single research institution. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. Long contract duration (3327 days) may indicate complex, multi-phase research objectives. 4. Focus on R&D in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences aligns with NIH's mission. 5. Contract awarded to a single entity may limit broader market engagement. 6. The contract's value per year is approximately $2.3 million, requiring careful performance monitoring.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19.3 million over 9 years for R&D services appears reasonable given the long-term nature of scientific research. Benchmarking against similar large-scale, multi-year research grants from NIH would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The 'COST NO FEE' contract type suggests that the government reimburses allowable costs incurred by the contractor, which is common for research and development where final costs can be uncertain. However, without specific deliverables or performance metrics, a definitive value assessment 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 a bid. With 21 bids received, this suggests a robust competitive environment for this research opportunity. A higher number of bidders generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government. The extensive number of bids implies that the Institute for Systems Biology was selected from a pool of qualified and competitive entities.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this substantial research contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source award. The presence of 21 bidders suggests that taxpayer funds were utilized efficiently by fostering competition.

Public Impact

The Institute for Systems Biology is the primary beneficiary, receiving significant funding for its research activities. The contract supports research and development in the physical, engineering, and life sciences, potentially leading to advancements in healthcare and scientific understanding. The geographic impact is primarily centered in Washington, where the Institute for Systems Biology is located. The contract likely supports a workforce of scientists, researchers, and administrative staff at the Institute.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration could lead to scope creep or evolving research needs not fully anticipated at award.
Cost-reimbursement contract type requires diligent oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and allocable.
Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's ongoing performance.
Reliance on a single contractor for such a long period may limit opportunities for innovation from other entities.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition with a significant number of bids (21) indicates a strong initial selection process.
The contract supports critical research and development aligned with the mission of the National Institutes of Health.
The long-term nature of the award suggests a stable funding environment for crucial scientific inquiry.
The contractor, Institute for Systems Biology, is a dedicated research institution, implying specialized expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This is a core area for agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which fund a substantial portion of non-defense R&D in the U.S. The market for R&D services is characterized by specialized expertise, long project timelines, and significant investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large, multi-year research grants awarded by NIH and other federal science agencies to academic institutions and research organizations.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). The primary contractor is the Institute for Systems Biology, a research institution. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears minimal unless the Institute for Systems Biology actively engages small businesses as subcontractors for specialized services or supplies.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the awarding agency, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a division of the Department of Health and Human Services. Given the 'COST NO FEE' contract type and long duration, NIH would likely employ mechanisms such as regular progress reports, financial reviews, and potentially site visits to ensure accountability and proper use of funds. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases, but detailed performance data may be less public for R&D grants. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

National Institutes of Health Research Grants
Biomedical Research and Development Contracts
Life Sciences Research Funding
Federal Grants for Scientific Research

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep and evolving requirements.
Cost-reimbursement contract type requires diligent oversight of expenditures.
Potential for research outcomes to become obsolete due to rapid scientific advancement.
Lack of specific performance metrics in summary data hinders ongoing performance assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $19.3 million to INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY.

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 $19.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-09-15. End: 2011-10-25.

What is the Institute for Systems Biology's track record with federal contracts, particularly with NIH?

The Institute for Systems Biology (ISB) has a history of receiving federal funding, primarily through grants and contracts, for its research endeavors. While the provided data highlights a significant contract awarded by NIH from 2002 to 2011, ISB's broader federal contracting history would need to be examined through databases like SAM.gov or FPDS. This would reveal the types of awards, agencies involved, and performance history. A strong track record with NIH, demonstrating successful completion of previous research projects and responsible financial management, would bolster confidence in their ability to execute the current contract effectively. Conversely, any past performance issues, such as missed deadlines or cost overruns, would warrant closer scrutiny.

How does the $19.3 million contract value compare to similar NIH R&D awards?

The $19.3 million awarded to the Institute for Systems Biology over approximately 9 years (2002-2011) represents a substantial investment. To benchmark this value, one would compare it to other large, multi-year research grants and contracts awarded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for similar R&D activities in the physical, engineering, and life sciences. NIH typically funds large-scale research through mechanisms like the R01 grant, which can be multi-year and substantial, though often smaller than this specific contract. However, large center grants or program project grants can reach similar or higher magnitudes. The average annual value of this contract is roughly $2.14 million ($19.3M / 9 years), which is a significant but not unprecedented figure for major research initiatives funded by NIH. A detailed comparison would involve analyzing the scope, duration, and specific research aims of comparable awards.

What are the primary risks associated with a long-duration, cost-reimbursement R&D contract?

Long-duration, cost-reimbursement R&D contracts present several inherent risks. Firstly, the 'COST NO FEE' structure means the government reimburses the contractor's allowable costs, which can be unpredictable in research settings. This necessitates robust oversight to ensure costs are reasonable, allocable, and directly related to the contract's objectives, preventing potential cost overruns or inefficient spending. Secondly, the extended duration (3327 days in this case) increases the risk of scope creep, where the project's objectives may evolve significantly over time, potentially diverging from the original intent or leading to increased costs. Thirdly, assessing contractor performance over such a long period can be challenging, requiring continuous monitoring and clear, adaptable performance metrics. Finally, there's a risk that the research outcomes may not align with initial expectations or may become obsolete due to rapid scientific advancements elsewhere.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' with 21 bidders in ensuring value for taxpayers on this contract?

The 'full and open competition' with 21 bidders is a strong indicator of a potentially effective process for ensuring value for taxpayers. A large number of bids suggests that the opportunity was widely known and that multiple qualified entities were interested and capable of performing the research. This level of competition typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. It also increases the likelihood that the government selects the most technically capable and cost-effective solution. The 'COST NO FEE' aspect, however, means that while the initial bid might be competitive, ongoing cost management and oversight are crucial to realizing the full value. The presence of 21 bidders strongly suggests that the government had a good selection pool, increasing the probability of a favorable outcome for taxpayer investment.

What are the historical spending patterns for NIH in the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' (NAICS 541710) category?

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a primary driver of federal spending in the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' (NAICS 541710) category. Historically, NIH's budget has been substantial, consistently ranking as one of the largest federal agencies for R&D outlays. Spending in this sector is characterized by long-term investments in basic and applied research across a vast array of scientific disciplines, including biology, medicine, chemistry, and engineering. NIH funding supports academic institutions, research hospitals, and private research organizations. Annual spending in this NAICS code by NIH fluctuates based on appropriations but generally represents billions of dollars, reflecting its critical role in advancing scientific knowledge and public health. This specific contract, while significant, is one of many within NIH's broader R&D portfolio.

What are the implications of the 'COST NO FEE' contract type for contractor incentives and government oversight?

The 'COST NO FEE' contract type, often used for research and development where project outcomes and final costs are uncertain, has specific implications. For the contractor, it provides assurance that allowable costs incurred in pursuit of the contract's objectives will be reimbursed, reducing their financial risk. This can incentivize undertaking complex or high-risk research that might otherwise be avoided. However, it also reduces the contractor's direct financial incentive to control costs rigorously, as they are not directly profiting from cost savings. For the government, this necessitates a heightened level of oversight. Agencies must implement strong financial management systems and conduct thorough reviews of contractor expenditures to ensure costs are reasonable, allocable, and allowable. Performance monitoring also becomes critical to ensure the research is progressing effectively towards its stated goals, compensating for the reduced contractor incentive for cost efficiency.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › N – Health R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Contractor Details

Address: 1441 N 34TH ST, SEATTLE, WA, 07

Business Categories: Category Business, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,705,958

Exercised Options: $2,705,958

Current Obligation: $19,311,734

Timeline