GSA awards $30.5M for MUOS PMSS to Tecolote Research, Inc., a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,550,839 ($30.6M)

Contractor: Tecolote Research, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2022-06-22

End Date: 2026-12-21

Contract Duration: 1,643 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: BASE AWARD FOR THE MOBILE USER OBJECTIVE SYSTEM (MUOS) PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICE (PMSS)

Place of Performance

Location: EL SEGUNDO, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 90245

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $30.6 million to TECOLOTE RESEARCH, INC. for work described as: BASE AWARD FOR THE MOBILE USER OBJECTIVE SYSTEM (MUOS) PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICE (PMSS) Key points: 1. Contract awarded for program management support services for the Mobile User Objective System (MUOS). 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 3. The duration of the contract is over 4 years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract was awarded under Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources, suggesting a competitive process with specific source exclusions. 5. The base award amount is substantial, requiring close monitoring of expenditures and performance. 6. The contractor, Tecolote Research, Inc., has experience in R&D and program management support. 7. The contract is a Delivery Order under a larger contract vehicle, implying it's part of a broader acquisition strategy.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The base award of $30.5 million for program management support services for the MUOS program is a significant investment. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, the government pays the contractor's actual costs plus a fixed fee for profit. This structure necessitates robust oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and that the fixed fee adequately compensates for the services rendered without excessive profit. Benchmarking this specific type of program management support against similar contracts for complex defense or communication systems would be necessary for a definitive value assessment. Without comparative data on per-hour rates or total program management costs for comparable systems, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources were excluded from the bidding process. The number of bidders is not specified in the provided data, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a competitive environment. The exclusion of specific sources could be due to various reasons, such as specialized capabilities or prior performance, but it may also limit the pool of potential offerors and potentially impact price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of the award, despite source exclusions, suggests that taxpayers likely benefited from a range of proposals and pricing. However, the exclusion of certain sources warrants scrutiny to ensure it did not unduly restrict competition and lead to higher costs than might have been achieved in a completely unrestricted process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense (DoD) and its personnel who rely on the MUOS for secure mobile communications. The services delivered include program management support, crucial for the successful execution and sustainment of the MUOS program. The geographic impact is likely global, as the MUOS system is designed for worldwide satellite communication. Workforce implications include the employment of program managers, analysts, and support staff by Tecolote Research, Inc., contributing to the R&D and defense support sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts require diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns and ensure the fixed fee remains appropriate for the work performed.
The exclusion of sources in a 'full and open' competition, while sometimes justified, can limit the competitive landscape and potentially impact final pricing.
The long duration of the contract (over 4 years) increases the risk of scope creep or evolving requirements that may not be adequately captured in the initial pricing.
Reliance on a single delivery order under a larger contract vehicle means the overall performance and value depend on the underlying master contract's terms and conditions.

Positive Signals

Awarding under 'Full and Open Competition' generally indicates a structured and competitive process, aiming for best value.
The selection of Tecolote Research, Inc. suggests they possess the necessary qualifications and experience for program management support in this specialized field.
The contract is for program management support, which, if executed effectively, can lead to more efficient program execution and cost savings in the long run.
The fixed fee component of the CPFF contract provides some level of cost predictability for the government, assuming the fee is well-negotiated.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on program management for a complex defense communication system. The R&D sector is characterized by innovation, long development cycles, and significant government investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at program management support contracts for other large-scale defense or telecommunications initiatives, such as satellite programs or advanced network deployments. The market for such specialized support services is often concentrated among a few experienced contractors capable of handling the technical and managerial complexities involved.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a small business set-aside. However, the prime contractor, Tecolote Research, Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors if it aligns with their strategy for fulfilling the contract requirements. The overall impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether Tecolote Research, Inc. actively seeks out and utilizes small business capabilities for specialized support services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) and potentially the contracting agency utilizing the MUOS system (likely the Department of Defense). Accountability measures will be embedded in the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, requiring detailed cost reporting and performance metrics. Transparency is typically facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected within the contract's execution.

Related Government Programs

Mobile User Objective System (MUOS)
Department of Defense Communications Systems
Satellite Communication Programs
Program Management Support Services
General Services Administration (GSA) Acquisition Vehicles

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF structure.
Risk of limited competition impacting price discovery due to source exclusion.
Long contract duration increases susceptibility to scope creep and requirement changes.
Dependency on the performance and terms of the underlying master contract vehicle.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $30.6 million to TECOLOTE RESEARCH, INC.. BASE AWARD FOR THE MOBILE USER OBJECTIVE SYSTEM (MUOS) PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICE (PMSS)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TECOLOTE RESEARCH, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-06-22. End: 2026-12-21.

What is the track record of Tecolote Research, Inc. in managing similar large-scale government contracts, particularly in defense or communications?

Tecolote Research, Inc. has a history of providing support services to government agencies, including in areas related to research, development, and engineering. Their experience often involves complex technical analysis and program management. While specific details on their track record with contracts of this exact scale and nature (MUOS PMSS) require deeper investigation into contract databases and performance reviews, their presence in the government contracting space suggests a baseline capability. Assessing their past performance on Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts would be crucial to understanding their ability to manage costs and deliver value under this award. A review of past performance evaluations and any reported issues on previous contracts would provide a more comprehensive picture of their reliability and effectiveness in similar roles.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types in terms of value for money for program management support?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or when there is significant uncertainty in the costs involved, such as in R&D or complex system development. For program management support, this structure allows flexibility as requirements evolve. However, it places a heavy burden on the government to meticulously track and audit contractor costs to ensure they are reasonable and allocable. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers less cost certainty for the government and can be susceptible to cost overruns if not managed rigorously. While it can incentivize contractors to perform by providing a guaranteed profit margin (the fixed fee), it may not always yield the best value for money if cost controls are weak. Other structures like Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) can offer better alignment of incentives for cost control and performance.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) that will be used to assess the success of Tecolote Research, Inc. under this contract?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a program management support contract like this typically focus on schedule adherence, cost control, quality of deliverables, and overall program support effectiveness. Specific KPIs might include meeting key program milestones on time, staying within projected cost ceilings (especially relevant for CPFF), the accuracy and timeliness of program reports, the effectiveness of risk identification and mitigation strategies proposed by the contractor, and the successful integration of support services with the overall MUOS program objectives. The contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Work Statement (PWS) would detail these specific metrics and the acceptable performance thresholds. Regular performance reviews between the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the contractor are essential for monitoring these KPIs.

What is the historical spending trend for program management support services for the MUOS program or similar satellite communication systems?

Analyzing historical spending for the MUOS program or comparable satellite communication systems is crucial for context. Without specific historical data for MUOS PMSS, we can infer trends from similar large-scale defense acquisition programs. These programs often involve multi-year, multi-billion dollar investments where program management support constitutes a significant, albeit often a smaller, percentage of the total cost. Spending typically escalates during development and initial deployment phases and may stabilize or decrease during sustainment. Fluctuations can occur due to program delays, scope changes, or technological advancements. Understanding the historical spending trajectory for MUOS, if available, would reveal patterns of investment and potential areas for cost efficiencies or risks.

What are the potential risks associated with the 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources' award method for this contract?

The 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources' award method presents specific risks. While aiming for broad competition, the exclusion of certain sources can limit the diversity of technical approaches and pricing strategies considered. This exclusion might be based on national security concerns, proprietary technology, or past performance issues, but if not carefully justified and documented, it could be perceived as unduly restrictive. The risk is that the government might not receive the most innovative solutions or the lowest possible price if highly capable potential offerors were excluded without a compelling reason. It also requires robust documentation to defend the exclusion decision and ensure the remaining pool of competitors was sufficient to achieve fair and reasonable pricing.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 47QFPA21Q0049

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 420 S FAIRVIEW AVE STE 201, GOLETA, CA, 93117

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,242,496

Exercised Options: $36,681,868

Current Obligation: $30,550,839

Actual Outlays: $-116,265

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 4

Total Subaward Amount: $19,140,904

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADS619

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline