GSA's $26.2M Additive Manufacturing Contract to University of Dayton Shows Moderate Value with Limited Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,227,986 ($26.2M)

Contractor: University of Dayton

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2020-02-19

End Date: 2021-03-18

Contract Duration: 393 days

Daily Burn Rate: $66.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: R&D

Official Description: EPSE IDIQ II TO6 - ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING AND COLD SPRAY SUPPORT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: DAYTON, GREENE County, OHIO, 45433

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $26.2 million to UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON for work described as: EPSE IDIQ II TO6 - ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING AND COLD SPRAY SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract's value of $26.2 million over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in specialized engineering services. 2. Competition dynamics appear limited, with the contract type and award details suggesting a potentially less competitive bidding process. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with the Time and Materials pricing structure potentially leading to cost overruns if not closely managed. 4. Performance context is tied to additive manufacturing and cold spray support, indicating a focus on advanced materials and production technologies. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the engineering services domain, supporting critical research and development for government applications.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this contract's value is challenging without specific comparable contracts for additive manufacturing and cold spray support services. The total award of $26.2 million over approximately 1.3 years indicates a substantial per-year spend. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if not meticulously monitored. Without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar projects, assessing the true value-for-money is difficult, but the scale suggests a need for specialized expertise.

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 offers. However, the specific details of the bidding process, such as the number of proposals received and the evaluation criteria, are not provided. A full and open competition is generally expected to yield competitive pricing, but the ultimate success depends on the number and quality of bidders and the specific requirements of the solicitation.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition aims to ensure that taxpayers receive the best possible value by encouraging a wide range of potential contractors to bid, driving down prices through market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely government agencies requiring advanced manufacturing capabilities, particularly in areas like aerospace, defense, and research. Services delivered include specialized support in additive manufacturing and cold spray technologies, crucial for prototyping, repair, and development of novel components. The geographic impact is primarily centered in Ohio, where the University of Dayton is located, potentially fostering local economic development and expertise. Workforce implications include the potential for highly skilled engineering and technical jobs related to advanced manufacturing processes.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials (T&M) contract type poses a risk of cost overruns if not managed with strict oversight.
Limited public information on the specific deliverables and performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the services.
The specialized nature of additive manufacturing and cold spray may limit the pool of qualified bidders in future procurements, potentially impacting competition.
Lack of detailed cost breakdowns hinders a thorough value-for-money assessment.

Positive Signals

Awarded under Full and Open Competition, suggesting an effort to maximize the bidder pool.
The contract supports advanced technological capabilities (additive manufacturing, cold spray) critical for government innovation.
The University of Dayton's involvement suggests a potential link to research institutions and cutting-edge development.
The contract duration of over a year allows for sustained support and project development.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically focusing on advanced materials and manufacturing processes like additive manufacturing (3D printing) and cold spray. This sector is critical for government innovation, particularly in defense, aerospace, and research and development. The market for specialized engineering services is competitive, with a mix of large corporations and specialized research institutions. Spending in this area is often driven by the need for rapid prototyping, customized component production, and the development of next-generation technologies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The primary contractor is the University of Dayton, which is not typically categorized as a small business. Future procurements in this specialized area might benefit from efforts to encourage small business participation, either through direct set-asides or by structuring requirements to be accessible to smaller, innovative firms.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Federal Acquisition Service. The contract's Time and Materials (T&M) nature necessitates robust oversight to ensure that costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract's objectives. Accountability measures would involve performance reviews, milestone tracking, and financial audits. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, but detailed performance reports and cost justifications may be less publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Advanced Materials Research
Additive Manufacturing Technologies
Cold Spray Applications
Engineering and Technical Support Services
Research and Development Contracts
General Services Administration (GSA) Procurements

Risk Flags

Time and Materials Pricing Structure
Limited Public Performance Data
Potential for Cost Overruns
Specialized Technology Area

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $26.2 million to UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON. EPSE IDIQ II TO6 - ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING AND COLD SPRAY SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-02-19. End: 2021-03-18.

What is the University of Dayton's track record with federal contracts, particularly in additive manufacturing and cold spray?

The University of Dayton has a significant history of engaging in federal research and development contracts, often in collaboration with government agencies like the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), which is headquartered nearby. Their expertise in materials science, aerospace engineering, and advanced manufacturing is well-established. While specific contract details for additive manufacturing and cold spray beyond this EPSE IDIQ II TO6 are not immediately available in this dataset, their institutional focus and location suggest a strong capability and likely a portfolio of related projects. Further investigation into their contract history with agencies like DoD, NASA, and DoE would provide a more comprehensive picture of their federal performance and specialization in these advanced fields.

How does the $26.2 million award compare to similar additive manufacturing and cold spray support contracts?

Directly comparing this $26.2 million award requires access to a database of similar, specialized contracts, which is not provided. However, the total award amount over its approximately 1.3-year duration suggests a substantial investment in these niche technological areas. Contracts for advanced R&D and specialized engineering services can vary widely in value depending on the scope, duration, and complexity. Given the cutting-edge nature of additive manufacturing and cold spray, and the potential for significant research and development, this figure appears to be within a reasonable range for a multi-year, focused effort. However, without specific benchmarks for similar government-funded projects, a definitive value comparison is difficult.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure used in this contract?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract is the potential for cost overruns, as the government pays for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred by the contractor, plus a fixed fee or percentage. This structure offers flexibility but lacks the cost certainty of fixed-price contracts. For the government, effective risk mitigation requires stringent oversight, detailed monitoring of labor hours and material usage, and clear definitions of what constitutes a 'material' and 'labor hour.' Without robust management and reporting, T&M contracts can become significantly more expensive than initially anticipated, especially if project scope creeps or inefficiencies arise within the contractor's operations.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition' strategy in ensuring competitive pricing for specialized engineering services like additive manufacturing?

Full and Open Competition is the statutory preference for federal procurements, designed to maximize the pool of potential offerors and thereby foster competition, which theoretically leads to better pricing and value. For specialized engineering services like additive manufacturing, its effectiveness depends heavily on the specificity of the requirement and the availability of qualified contractors. If the requirement is too niche, the number of capable bidders might still be limited, even under full and open competition. Conversely, if the requirement is well-defined and the market has several capable providers, it can be highly effective. The ultimate success hinges on the solicitation's clarity, the evaluation criteria, and the actual number and quality of proposals received.

What are the potential long-term implications of this contract for the advancement of additive manufacturing within the federal government?

This contract, by funding specialized support services in additive manufacturing and cold spray, contributes to the federal government's overall capability and understanding of these advanced technologies. It can lead to the development of new materials, improved design processes, and more efficient production methods for government applications, potentially in defense, aerospace, or other critical sectors. Such investments can foster innovation, reduce reliance on traditional manufacturing, and enable the creation of complex, customized parts. The knowledge and expertise gained can inform future procurement strategies and R&D investments, potentially accelerating the adoption and integration of additive manufacturing across various government agencies.

Are there any indications of potential cost savings or efficiencies achieved through this contract compared to alternative methods?

The provided data does not contain specific information to assess cost savings or efficiencies achieved through this contract compared to alternative methods. While additive manufacturing and cold spray technologies themselves can offer efficiencies in certain applications (e.g., reduced material waste, faster prototyping), the effectiveness of this particular contract in realizing those benefits is not detailed. The Time and Materials pricing structure, as noted, carries inherent risks to cost control. A thorough analysis would require performance reports, cost-benefit analyses conducted by the agency, or comparisons of production costs for specific components manufactured via additive methods versus traditional ones.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: ID05170029006

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 300 COLLEGE PARK, DAYTON, OH, 45469

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Private), Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $32,337,428

Exercised Options: $27,434,758

Current Obligation: $26,227,986

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS05Q17BMD0005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline