University of Utah receives $16.9M for SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE research, awarded via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,948,833 ($16.9M)

Contractor: University of Utah

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2018-08-15

End Date: 2026-04-30

Contract Duration: 2,815 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST SHARING

Sector: R&D

Official Description: SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE

Place of Performance

Location: SALT LAKE CITY, SALT LAKE County, UTAH, 84112

State: Utah Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $16.9 million to UNIVERSITY OF UTAH for work described as: SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE Key points: 1. Contract value of $16.9M over nearly 8 years suggests a significant, long-term investment in research infrastructure. 2. Awarded to a single entity, the University of Utah, indicating specialized capabilities or a focused research objective. 3. The 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' NAICS code points to a high-tech, knowledge-intensive project. 4. Full and open competition implies a broad market solicitation, potentially leading to competitive pricing and diverse solutions. 5. The contract's duration of 2815 days (approx. 7.7 years) highlights the sustained nature of the research effort. 6. Cost-sharing arrangement suggests a partnership model, potentially leveraging institutional resources alongside federal funding.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $16.9M spread over approximately 7.7 years results in an average annual spend of roughly $2.2M. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale R&D infrastructure contracts is challenging without more specific project details. However, the cost-sharing aspect suggests that the federal government is not bearing the entire financial burden, which can be a positive indicator of value. The specific nature of 'SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE' would be key to a more precise value assessment.

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. This suggests a robust competitive process was intended. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open nature of the solicitation generally promotes price discovery and allows the government to select from a wide range of potential contractors, theoretically leading to better value.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible price and quality by encouraging multiple companies to bid and compete.

Public Impact

The University of Utah is the primary beneficiary, receiving substantial funding to enhance its research infrastructure. The project supports advancements in physical, engineering, and life sciences research, potentially leading to new discoveries and innovations. The geographic impact is centered in Utah, where the university is located, likely benefiting the local research ecosystem and workforce. This contract could foster job creation within the university's research departments and support staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the infrastructure development.
The long duration of the contract could introduce risks related to technological obsolescence or shifts in research priorities.
Details on how the cost-sharing is structured are not provided, which could obscure the true total investment and potential for cost overruns.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that should yield fair pricing.
The cost-sharing arrangement indicates a partnership, potentially demonstrating the university's commitment and leveraging of resources.
The significant funding allocated to core infrastructure suggests a strategic investment in long-term research capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This is a critical area for innovation and economic growth. The market for R&D services is highly competitive, with significant government investment driving advancements. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend heavily on the specific type of infrastructure being developed, but large-scale university research infrastructure projects often represent substantial, multi-year investments.

Small Business Impact

The contract does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions. As it was awarded under full and open competition to a large research institution, the primary focus is likely on the prime contractor's capabilities. There may be opportunities for small businesses to subcontract, but this is not explicitly detailed in the provided data. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the subcontracting plans, if any.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would likely be managed by the awarding agency, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a division of the Department of Health and Human Services. Accountability measures would typically involve regular progress reports, financial audits, and adherence to research protocols. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases and public reporting, though specific project details might be proprietary. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

National Institutes of Health Research Grants
National Science Foundation Infrastructure Awards
Department of Energy Research Facilities

Risk Flags

Potential for technological obsolescence due to long contract duration.
Risk of shifting research priorities impacting infrastructure relevance.
Limited competition (one offer) despite full and open solicitation requires further investigation.
Lack of specified performance metrics hinders outcome assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $16.9 million to UNIVERSITY OF UTAH. SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF UTAH.

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 $16.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-08-15. End: 2026-04-30.

What is the specific nature of the 'SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE' being funded, and what are the key performance indicators for this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the 'SEER - CORE INFRASTRUCTURE.' 'SEER' could refer to a specific program or initiative, while 'CORE INFRASTRUCTURE' suggests foundational elements for research, such as laboratory equipment, data management systems, or specialized facilities. Key performance indicators (KPIs) are also not detailed. Typically, for infrastructure projects, KPIs might include timely completion of construction or installation, system uptime and reliability, capacity utilization, and adherence to safety standards. Without this information, assessing the project's success and value is limited. Further details would likely be found in the contract statement of work or associated documentation.

How does the $16.9M contract value compare to similar R&D infrastructure investments at other major research universities?

Directly comparing the $16.9M contract value requires understanding the scope and type of infrastructure. Large-scale R&D infrastructure projects at major universities can range from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars. For instance, building a new research wing, acquiring a major scientific instrument (like an advanced MRI or particle accelerator), or establishing a large-scale computing cluster could all fall under 'core infrastructure.' This $16.9M appears to be a significant but potentially moderate investment within that spectrum, especially considering it's spread over nearly eight years. The cost-sharing aspect also means the total project cost is likely higher than $16.9M. Benchmarking would necessitate comparing it to projects of similar scale and purpose, which are not detailed here.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract of this duration (2815 days) for R&D infrastructure?

Contracts spanning nearly eight years for R&D infrastructure carry several inherent risks. Technological obsolescence is a primary concern; the technology or equipment funded at the start of the contract might be outdated by its completion. Research priorities can also shift over such a long period, potentially making the funded infrastructure less relevant or necessary. Furthermore, long-term contracts increase exposure to economic fluctuations, changes in funding policies, and potential cost overruns due to unforeseen circumstances. Managing scope creep and ensuring continued alignment with evolving scientific needs are critical challenges for both the contractor and the funding agency throughout the contract's lifecycle.

What does the 'Cost Sharing' (PT: COST SHARING) designation imply for the University of Utah and the federal government?

The 'Cost Sharing' designation signifies that the University of Utah is contributing its own resources towards the project, in addition to the $16.9M federal funding. This can take various forms, such as providing facilities, equipment, personnel time, or direct financial contributions. For the federal government, cost sharing can be a positive indicator, suggesting the university has a strong commitment to the research and is willing to invest its own funds, potentially leading to better project outcomes and resource utilization. It also implies that the federal investment is leveraged, meaning the total project cost exceeds the federal award. For the university, it represents a significant commitment of institutional resources, often undertaken to secure access to advanced infrastructure or critical research funding.

Given the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' award type, what does the absence of multiple bidders (NO: 1) suggest?

The data indicates 'NO: 1', which typically refers to the number of offers or bidders received. If '1' signifies only one bid was received despite a 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' solicitation, it could suggest several possibilities. The market for this specific type of specialized research infrastructure might be limited, with few entities possessing the required capabilities. Alternatively, the solicitation requirements might have been overly stringent or the anticipated award value insufficient to attract multiple competitors. It could also indicate a successful pre-solicitation engagement where potential bidders determined they were not the best fit. While full and open competition aims for broad participation, receiving only one offer warrants scrutiny to ensure fair pricing and avoid potential sole-source situations in practice.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N01PC6500374

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST SHARING (T)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 201 S PRESIDENT CIRCLE RM 408, SALT LAKE CITY, UT, 84112

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Government, Higher Education, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Public), U.S. Regional/State Government

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $22,442,705

Exercised Options: $16,948,833

Current Obligation: $16,948,833

Actual Outlays: $9,702,722

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 75N91018D00016

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline