NASA awards $7.7M contract to Southwest Research Institute for space vehicle ground support and operations
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $7,745,500 ($7.7M)
Contractor: Southwest Research Institute
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2025-01-22
End Date: 2034-01-31
Contract Duration: 3,296 days
Daily Burn Rate: $2.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: DESIGN, ANALYZE, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, VERIFY, EVALUATE, SUPPORT LAUNCH, SUPPLY AND MAINTAIN THE INSTRUMENT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE), AND SUPPORT MISSION OPERATIONS AT NOSF.
Place of Performance
Location: SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR County, TEXAS, 78238
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $7.7 million to SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE for work described as: DESIGN, ANALYZE, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, VERIFY, EVALUATE, SUPPORT LAUNCH, SUPPLY AND MAINTAIN THE INSTRUMENT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE), AND SUPPORT MISSION OPERATIONS AT NOSF. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical ground support equipment and mission operations for space vehicles. 2. Long-term contract duration of nearly 9 years suggests a need for sustained support. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) allows for flexibility but requires careful cost oversight. 4. Competition was full and open, indicating a potentially competitive bidding process. 5. The awardee, Southwest Research Institute, has a history of supporting complex aerospace projects. 6. Geographic concentration in Texas for contract performance.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $7.7 million over nearly 9 years appears reasonable for specialized aerospace support services. Benchmarking against similar NASA contracts for ground support equipment (GSE) and mission operations is challenging without more specific service details. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure suggests that costs will be reimbursed, plus a fixed fee for profit, which is common for development and integration efforts where final costs are uncertain. The fixed fee component provides some cost control for the agency.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 3 bids received. This indicates a healthy level of interest and a competitive process for this specialized service. The presence of multiple bidders suggests that NASA sought a broad range of capabilities and likely received competitive proposals, which should contribute to fair pricing and optimal selection of a contractor.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to better pricing and a wider selection of qualified contractors, ensuring the government receives the best value.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA and its space exploration missions, which will receive essential ground support and operational services. Services include the design, analysis, development, fabrication, integration, testing, and maintenance of instrument ground support equipment. The contract also covers support for mission operations at the NASA Oceanographic and Space Science Facility (NOSF). Performance is concentrated in Texas, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the state's aerospace sector. The long duration of the contract provides stability for the contractor and ensures continuity of critical support functions.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
- The long contract duration (nearly 9 years) requires sustained oversight to ensure performance remains optimal and costs are controlled.
- Specific details on the 'instrument ground support equipment' are not provided, making a precise technical risk assessment difficult.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition with 3 bidders, indicating a robust selection process.
- The contractor, Southwest Research Institute, is a reputable organization with extensive experience in aerospace and defense.
- The contract addresses critical support functions essential for mission success.
- The long-term nature of the contract provides stability and continuity for vital space operations.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing sector, a specialized area of the aerospace industry. This sector is characterized by high technical requirements, significant R&D investment, and stringent quality control. Spending in this area is often project-driven and tied to specific government programs. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other NASA or Department of Defense contracts for similar GSE development, integration, and mission support services, which often run into millions of dollars due to the complexity and criticality involved.
Small Business Impact
The contract data indicates that small business participation (ss: false) and set-asides (sb: false) were not applicable to this award. This suggests the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses, and there is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific contract appears limited, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses in their supply chain.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract will primarily be managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, NASA will need to closely monitor all incurred costs to ensure they are reasonable and allocable to the contract scope. Performance metrics and milestones outlined in the contract will be crucial for assessing progress and ensuring timely delivery of services. Transparency is expected through regular reporting requirements from the contractor and potential reviews by NASA's program management and potentially its Office of Inspector General if significant issues arise.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Launch Services Program
- NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate
- Department of Defense Ground Support Equipment Contracts
- National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) Mission Support Contracts
Risk Flags
- Long-term contract requires sustained performance monitoring.
- CPFF structure necessitates rigorous cost auditing.
- Scope definition for 'instrument ground support equipment' could be broad.
Tags
nasa, aerospace, ground-support-equipment, mission-operations, cost-plus-fixed-fee, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, southwest-research-institute, texas, space-vehicle-manufacturing, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $7.7 million to SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE. DESIGN, ANALYZE, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, VERIFY, EVALUATE, SUPPORT LAUNCH, SUPPLY AND MAINTAIN THE INSTRUMENT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE), AND SUPPORT MISSION OPERATIONS AT NOSF.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $7.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2025-01-22. End: 2034-01-31.
What is Southwest Research Institute's track record with NASA and similar government contracts?
Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) has a well-established track record of supporting NASA and other government agencies on complex technical projects. They are known for their expertise in various engineering disciplines, including aerospace, mechanical, and electrical engineering. SwRI has previously been involved in developing and testing spacecraft components, scientific instruments, and ground support systems for numerous space missions. Their experience often spans research and development, fabrication, integration, and testing, aligning well with the scope of this contract. While specific contract values and performance details for all past projects are not publicly itemized here, SwRI's consistent engagement with agencies like NASA suggests a history of successful performance and reliability in delivering technical solutions for demanding programs.
How does the $7.7 million value compare to similar NASA ground support contracts?
The $7.7 million value for this nearly 9-year contract appears to be on the lower end for comprehensive ground support equipment (GSE) and mission operations support, especially considering the long duration. However, the exact scope of 'instrument ground support equipment' and the specific mission operations being supported are critical factors. NASA contracts for GSE can range from a few million dollars for specific component support to hundreds of millions for large-scale, multi-year programs involving complex launch infrastructure. Given the description, this contract likely focuses on specialized instrumentation rather than entire launch systems. Without more granular details on the complexity and number of instruments supported, a precise comparison is difficult, but the value suggests a focused scope of work.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this nature?
The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, like this one awarded to Southwest Research Institute, revolve around cost control and contractor efficiency. While the fixed fee provides a defined profit margin for the contractor, the 'cost plus' portion means the government reimburses actual costs incurred. If the contractor's costs are higher than anticipated due to inefficiencies, scope creep, or unforeseen technical challenges, the total contract value can increase significantly. NASA must implement robust oversight to scrutinize all claimed costs, ensure they are reasonable, allocable, and allowable, and prevent unnecessary expenditures. There's also a risk that the contractor might prioritize completing tasks to earn their fee over optimizing for the most cost-effective solutions, although the long-term nature of this contract may incentivize sustained performance.
How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for taxpayer money in specialized aerospace contracts?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money, even in specialized fields like aerospace. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it maximizes the pool of potential contractors, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. For specialized contracts, this means NASA can identify the most capable and cost-effective providers. The fact that 3 bids were received for this contract indicates sufficient competition existed. While specialized knowledge is required, competition ensures that multiple entities are vying to provide those services, preventing a single source from dictating terms and prices, thereby safeguarding taxpayer funds.
What are the implications of the contract's long duration (nearly 9 years) for NASA and the contractor?
The long duration of this contract (ending January 31, 2034) has several implications. For NASA, it ensures continuity of essential ground support and mission operations services, reducing the administrative burden and potential disruption associated with frequent re-competitions. It allows for a deeper integration of the contractor's expertise into ongoing mission phases. For Southwest Research Institute, the long-term commitment provides significant program stability and revenue predictability, enabling them to invest in specialized personnel and equipment. However, it also places a greater emphasis on NASA's long-term oversight capabilities to manage performance, costs, and evolving requirements over an extended period, ensuring the agency continues to receive value throughout the contract's life.
How does the geographic concentration in Texas impact the contract's execution and oversight?
The geographic concentration of performance in Texas (st: TX, sn: TEXAS) means that NASA's oversight activities, such as site visits, inspections, and performance reviews, will likely be focused on facilities within that state. This can streamline some aspects of oversight by consolidating monitoring efforts. It also suggests potential economic benefits for the Texas aerospace sector through job creation and local spending by the contractor. However, it also means that if any issues arise that require immediate on-site intervention, the distance from NASA centers in other states could introduce minor delays. The primary impact is likely logistical for oversight and economic for the local region.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: INSTRUMENTS AND LABORATORY EQPT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: 80GSFC23R0037
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 6220 CULEBRA RD, SAN ANTONIO, TX, 78238
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $26,162,610
Exercised Options: $26,162,610
Current Obligation: $7,745,500
Actual Outlays: $3,475,458
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 1
Total Subaward Amount: $270,513
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2025-01-22
Current End Date: 2034-01-31
Potential End Date: 2034-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-04-02
More Contracts from Southwest Research Institute
- TAS::80 0120::TAS AS the Principal Investigator (PI) Institution for the Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) Instrument Suite Science Team (isst), the Contractor IS Responsible for Leading the Solving Magnetospheric Acceleration Reconnection and Turbulence (smart) Team Through ALL Mission Phases. the Scope of Work Shall Include, BUT NOT BE Limited, to the Following: - Manage the Smart Team Through Phases B Through E of the MMS Mission, - Defining Science Goals and Objectives - Assist the MMS Project and HQ Science Mission Directorate Heliophysics Division in the Preparation of Level 1 Requirements for the MMS Mission - Flow-Down of Top-Level Mission Requirements to the Appropriate Elements of the Instrument Suite - Design, Fabrication, Integration, Calibration, Testing and Delivery of Four Fully Qualified, Flight Instrument Suites to Observatory Integration and Test (I&T) Plus Spares - Design, Development, Integration and Testing of the SOC - Support Observatory-Level I&T Activities - Provide Sustaining Engineering and I&T Support of the Instrument Suites After Delivery to Nasa - Responsibility for the On-Orbit Operation, Health and Safety of the Instrument Suites - Responsibility for Operating and Maintaining the SOC Post-Launch - Establishing and Managing Subcontracts With Instrument Suite Team Members - Establishing and Maintaining the Required International Traffic in Arms Regulations (itar) and Export Control Documentation Necessary for Working With ITS International Team Members - Implementation of an EPO Program for the MMS Mission — $383.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE National Aeronautics and Space Administration HAS Selected Juno NEW Frontiers Mission Under the Direction of Principal Investigator (PI) DR. Scott Bolton to Continue Development With the Expectation That the Juno Mission Will Enter Phase B in Early Fiscal Year 2006. the Juno Mission Will BE Managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center, NEW Frontiers Program Office. KEY Juno Team Members Include DR. Bolton's Home Institution, the Southwest Research Institute (swri), the Juno Implementation Team Leader JET Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the Spacecraft BUS Provider the Lockheed Martin Space Systems Division (lm/Ss). the PI'S Team AT Swri Needs to Begin Work on a Subset of Phase B Activities AS Early in FY06 AS Possible. This SOW Provides a List of Activities That ARE Necessary to Begin Work in FY06 and Their Associated Deliverables. the Juno Mission IS a Collaboration Between Southwest Research Institute (swri), JPL, Lockheed Martin (LM), and a Complementary Team of Universities and Field Centers. the Principal Investigator, DR. Scott Bolton, IS AT Southwest Research Institute (swri) and IS Responsible to Nasa for ALL Aspects of the Mission Including Achieving ALL Scientific Objectives and Mission Goals. JPL Provides the Project Manager WHO Oversees the Day-To-Day Management of the Project and Will Report to the PI. Principal Investigator (PI) DR. Scott Bolton IS Responsible to Nasa for Meeting the Scientific Objectives of the Juno Mission Within Cost and Schedule. AS PI, DR. Bolton HAS Direct Accountability to the Nasa NEW Frontiers Program Office for the Implementation of Juno. ALL Juno Science Co-Is, the Deputy PI and Project Scientist, the Science Investigation Office Manager, the E/PO Effort, the Juno Advisory Board and the PM Report Directly to DR. Bolton. the PI Delegates the Day-To-Day Management of the Project to the Project Manager (PM), Rick Grammier. the Project System Engineer, Payload Manager, Flight System Manager, Mission Manager, Science OPS Center, Business Manager, LM Contract CTM, and Mission Assurance Manager ALL Report Directly to the PM — $184.3M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- NEW Horizon -- Pluto Mission Phase B — $166.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Under This Contract, the Contractor Will Provide the Personnel, Materials, Equipment, and Facilities Necessary to Produce the Polarimeter to Unify the Corona Heliosphere (punch) Phase a Concept Study. the Scope of This Effort Includes, BUT IS NOT Limited TO: 1. Principal Investigator Program Office 2. Instrument System Engineering, Including Instrument Mission Assurance 3. Design of a Flight Qualified Punch Instrument Meeting Mission and Science Requirements 4. Develop Plans in Support of Integration and Test of the Punch Instrument Flight System 5. Develop Plans in Support of Essential Field Operations 6. Develop Plans in Support of Launch Operations and Flight Operations 7. Develop Plans for Lead the Punch Science Investigation AS Well AS the Generation of Resulting Data Products the Contractor Shall Provide a Briefing on the Punch Science and Science Implementation Plan AT the Phase a Site Visit. the Contractor Shall Provide an Organization Chart Defining Contractor Roles and Responsibilities, Reporting Procedures, and ALL Lines of Authority. the Contractor Shall Participate in Defining the Relationships Between the Contractor's Program Office and the Nasa Explorers Program Office. the Contractor Shall Develop a Punch Instrument Systems Requirements Document and a Punch Mission Systems Requirements Document. the Contractor Will Also Develop Detailed Block Diagrams and Technical Descriptions of ALL Instrument Systems. the Contractor Will Conduct In-Depth Instrument-Level Reviews of the Proposed Instrument Design. They Will Conduct Essential Trade Studies, Analyses, Modeling and Simulations to Assure Compliance With Instrument Requirements. the Contractor Will Lead the Science Team and Develop an Instrument-Level Test Plan and Participate in Planning for Integration and Test. the Contractor Shall Prepare a Detailed Instrument Development Schedule Covering ALL Mission Phases, Listing Major Milestones, Including a Defined Critical Path and Schedule Reserves. the Contractor Will Prepare Updated Instrument Budgets AS Well AS Review and Approve the Overall Punch Budget. Finally, the Contractor Shall Prepare and Submit the Concept Study Report — $139.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- TAS::80 0120::TAS the Contractor Shall BE Responsible for the Conduct of ALL Phases and Aspects of the Ibex Mission Including: 1) Life-Cycle Project Management; 2) Design, Test, Development, and Operations (payload, Spacecraft, Launch Vehicle, Spacecraft to Launch-Vehicle Interfaces, Launch and Flight Operations); and 3) Post-Operations Data Analysis and Archiving. in Performance of This Effort, the Ibex Team Shall: a. Manage the Project, Provide Cost and Schedule Information to Nasa AS Specified in 3.0 Management, Above. B. Provide Day-To-Day Management and Coordination of the Project AS Delegated by the PI to the Project Manager (PM), Including Monitoring and Reporting Technical Progress and Financial Status, Implementing the Risk Management Plan and Conducting Mission Level Reviews AS Specified in Section 4.3, System Level Reviews. C. Conduct Reviews for ALL Payload Sensors, Payload Support Infrastructure and Associated GSE. D. Perform Scientific Analyses in Support of the Mission Science Requirements. E. Perform Systems Engineering to Coordinate the Design of the Instrument Complement and Spacecraft BUS Components; and to Ensure the Compatibility of the Space-To-Ground and Network Communications. F. Perform Trade Studies to Eliminate and Mitigate Risks G. Deliver the Ibex Flight Segment to Vandenberg AIR Force Base (vafb), Support Integration With the Launch Vehicle, and Assist the Launch Operations; H. Establish the Mission Control Center (MCC) and Ibex Science Operations and Data Analysis Center (isoc) Including ALL Computers, Networks, and Operating Software, Instrument Databases and Procedures Necessary to Functionally Test and Later Control the Spacecraft; I. Hold Science Team Meetings AS Well AS Technical Interchange Meetings. J. Baseline the Science Requirements and Science Analysis Plan Into an Ibex Mission Definition Requirements Agreement (mdra) and the Ibex Data Management Plan. K. Implement an Approved Mission Assurance Plan. L. Implement a Systems Engineering Function to Verify Performance Specification Compliance to the Mission Science Requirements. M. Design, Fabricate, Integrate and Test the Payload, Spacecraft, Solid Rocket Motor and Launch Vehicle Adapter, and Integrate the Ibex Flight Segment With the Launch Vehicle. N. Implement a Safety Program Including the Generation of the Missile System Pre-Launch Safety Package (mspsp). O. Support Launch, Perform On-Orbit Checkout, and Establish On-Orbit Data Acquisition Contact With the Payload. Within the First 30 Days After Launch, Initial Engineering and Science Checkout and Verification of Spacecraft In-Flight Operation Will BE Performed. P. Provide the Services of the MCC and the Isoc. Q. Conduct the E/PO Program in Cooperation With the Identified Team Members — $116.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts
- International Space Station — $22.4B (THE Boeing Company)
- TAS::80 0124::TAS Design, Development, Test&evaluation of Project Orion — $15.5B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- Provide Developmental Hardware and Test Articles, and Manufacture and Assemble Ares I Upper Stages. the Upper Stage (US) Element IS an Integral Part of the Ares I Launch Vehicle and Provides the Second Stage of Flight. the US Element IS Responsible for the Roll Control During the First Stage Burn and Separation; and Will Provide the Guidance and Navigation, Command and Data Handling, and Other Avionics Functions for the Ares I During ALL Phases of the Ascent Flight. the US Element IS a NEW Design That Emphasizes Safety, Operability, and Minimum Life Cycle Cost. the Overall Design, Development, Test and Evaluation (ddt&e), Production, and Sustaining Engineering Efforts Include Activities Performed by Three Organizations; the Nasa Design Team (NDT), the Upper Stage Production Contractor (uspc) and the Instrument Unit Production Contractor (iupc). for Clarity, the Uspc Will BE Referred to AS the Contractor Throughout This Document. Nasa IS Responsible for the Integration of the Primary Elements of the Ares I Launch Vehicle Including: the First Stage, US Including Instrument Unit (IU), and US Engine; and Will Also Integrate the Ares I Launch Vehicle AT the Launch Site. Nasa IS Responsible for the Ddt&e, Including Technical and Programmatic Integration of the US Subsystems and Government-Furnished Property. Nasa Will Lead the Effort to Develop the Requirements and Specifications of the US Element, the Development Plan and Testing Requirements, and ALL Design Documentation, Initial Manufacturing and Assembly Process Planning, Logistics Planning, and Operations Support Planning. Development, Qualification, and Acceptance Testing Will BE Conducted by Nasa and the Contractor to Satisfy Requirements and for Risk Mitigation. Nasa IS Responsible for the Overall Upper Stage Verification and Validation Process and Will Require Support From the Contractor. the Contractor IS Responsible for the Manufacture and Assembly of the Upper Stage Test Flight and Operational Upper Stage Units Including the Installation of Upper Stage Instrument Unit, the Government-Furnished US Engine, Booster Separation Motors, and Other Government-Furnished Property. a Description of the Nasa Managed and Performed Efforts IS Contained in the US Work Packages and Will BE Made Available to the Contractor to Ensure Their Understanding of the Roles and Responsibilities of the NDT, Iupc, and Contractor During the Design, Development, and Operation of the US Element. the US Conceptual Design Described in the Uso-Clv-Se-25704 US Design Definition Document (DDD) IS the Baseline Design for This Contract. the Contractors Early Role Will BE to Provide Producibility Engineering Support to Nasa VIA the Established US Office Structure and to Provide Inputs Into the Final Design Configuration, Specifications, and Standards. Nasa Will Transition the Manufacturing and Assembly, Logistics Support Infrastructure, Configuration Management, and the Sustaining Engineering Functions to the Contractor AT the KEY Points During the Development and Implementation of the Program Currently Planned to Occur NO Later Than 90 Days After the Completion of the Following Major Milestones: Manufacturing and Assembly US Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Logistics Support Infrastructure US PDR Configuration Management US Critical Design Review CDR) Sustaining Engineering US Design Certification Review (DCR) After the Completion of an Orderly Transition of Roles and Responsibilities to the Contractor, Nasa Will Assume an Insight Role Into the Contractors Production, Sustaining Engineering, and Operations Support of the Ares I US Test Program and Flight Hardware. After DCR, the Contractor Will BE Responsible for Sustaining Engineering PER SOW Section 4.7, AS Necessary to Maintain and Support the US Configuration and for Production and Operations Support — $10.5B (THE Boeing Company)
- Space Program Operations Contract (spoc) — $8.5B (United Space Alliance, LLC)
- Joint Us/Russian Human Space Flight Activities — $4.7B (Russia Space Agency)
View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →