NASA awards $2.6M contract for Specturm software development to Agile Decision Sciences, LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $2,610,222 ($2.6M)
Contractor: Agile Decision Sciences, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2021-04-01
End Date: 2026-03-31
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $1.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: TO7- SPECTURM SOFTWARE APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
Place of Performance
Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20407
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $2.6 million to AGILE DECISION SCIENCES, LLC for work described as: TO7- SPECTURM SOFTWARE APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a competitive process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can present cost control challenges. 3. Performance period spans five years, suggesting a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract is for software application development and management support. 5. The awardee, Agile Decision Sciences, LLC, is a small business. 6. The contract is being performed in Washington D.C.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar software development contracts. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure means costs can fluctuate, and the fixed fee is applied to the estimated cost. While the total award is $2.6 million over five years, the annual value is approximately $522,000. This is a moderate amount for specialized software development and management, but its true value depends heavily on the scope and complexity of the 'Specturm' application and the efficiency of the contractor.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources may have been excluded for particular reasons, or the initial solicitation might have had limitations. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'exclusion of sources' phrasing implies a potentially narrower field than a truly unrestricted full and open competition. This could impact the level of price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs compared to a process with maximum bidder participation.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not benefit from the most aggressive pricing possible if the exclusion of certain sources limited the competitive pool. However, the 'full and open' aspect suggests an effort to ensure a reasonable level of competition.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's internal operations, which will receive enhanced or new software applications. Services delivered include software application development and ongoing management support, crucial for maintaining and improving IT infrastructure. The geographic impact is primarily within Washington D.C., where the contract is being performed. Workforce implications include potential job creation or utilization of specialized IT professionals by the contractor, Agile Decision Sciences, LLC.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed.
- The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition method might limit the breadth of competitive pricing.
- Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess contractor efficiency and value.
- The five-year duration could lock in costs without regular re-evaluation of market rates.
Positive Signals
- Awarded to a small business, potentially supporting small business growth within the federal contracting ecosystem.
- The contract is for essential IT services, indicating a strategic investment in NASA's technological capabilities.
- The five-year performance period suggests a stable, long-term need, allowing for focused development and support.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically focusing on software application development and management. The broader IT services market within the federal government is substantial, with significant spending on software development, cloud services, and IT support. Comparable spending benchmarks for custom software development contracts of this duration and value vary widely based on complexity, but $2.6 million over five years represents a moderate investment. This contract fits within NASA's ongoing efforts to modernize and maintain its complex IT systems.
Small Business Impact
Agile Decision Sciences, LLC, the awardee, is identified as a small business. This award aligns with federal goals to support small businesses in the contracting landscape. As a small business prime contractor, they are likely to perform a significant portion of the work themselves. However, the contract details do not specify any subcontracting requirements or set-asides for other small businesses, meaning the direct impact on the broader small business ecosystem beyond the prime contractor is not detailed.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract will primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Specific oversight mechanisms, such as regular progress reviews, performance monitoring, and financial audits, are expected to be detailed within the contract's statement of work and terms. Accountability measures will be tied to meeting performance milestones and adhering to the CPFF structure. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, but detailed project progress and spending reports are typically internal to the agency unless otherwise mandated.
Related Government Programs
- NASA IT Modernization Programs
- Federal Software Development Contracts
- Engineering and Technical Services
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Risk Flags
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires close monitoring to control costs.
- Potential for limited price discovery due to 'exclusion of sources' in competition.
- Long contract duration (5 years) may lead to technological obsolescence or requirement drift.
- Lack of detailed scope for 'Specturm' application hinders value assessment.
Tags
it, software-development, nasa, cost-plus-fixed-fee, small-business, washington-dc, engineering-services, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, delivery-order, ict
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $2.6 million to AGILE DECISION SCIENCES, LLC. TO7- SPECTURM SOFTWARE APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is AGILE DECISION SCIENCES, LLC.
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 $2.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2021-04-01. End: 2026-03-31.
What is the specific nature and complexity of the 'Specturm' software application being developed and managed?
The provided data does not detail the specific functionalities or complexity of the 'Specturm' software application. This information is crucial for a thorough assessment of the contract's value and the contractor's performance. Understanding whether 'Specturm' is a mission-critical system, an internal administrative tool, or a research-oriented application would provide context for the $2.6 million investment over five years. Without this detail, it's difficult to benchmark the cost against industry standards for similar software projects. Further inquiry into NASA's project documentation or the contract's statement of work would be necessary to ascertain the application's scope and criticality.
How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types for similar software development services at NASA?
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, or when there is uncertainty about the costs involved, such as in research and development or complex software projects. For NASA, CPFF allows flexibility but places a greater burden on the agency to closely monitor contractor costs to ensure they remain reasonable and justified. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers less price certainty for the government but can be more suitable for innovative or evolving projects. Other agencies might favor FFP for well-defined software projects to ensure cost predictability. The choice of CPFF here suggests NASA anticipated potential cost uncertainties or scope changes during the five-year performance period.
What were the specific reasons for 'exclusion of sources' in this 'Full and Open Competition' award?
The designation 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' implies that the solicitation was initially intended for broad competition, but certain potential sources were subsequently excluded. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed in the provided data and could range from failure to meet minimum qualifications, non-responsiveness to the solicitation, or specific agency decisions based on past performance or capabilities. This method aims to balance broad competition with ensuring that only qualified and capable offerors participate, potentially streamlining the evaluation process. However, it inherently narrows the competitive field compared to a standard 'Full and Open Competition' without exclusions.
What is the track record of Agile Decision Sciences, LLC in performing similar federal IT contracts, particularly CPFF agreements?
Information regarding the specific track record of Agile Decision Sciences, LLC, particularly concerning their performance on similar federal IT contracts and specifically Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) agreements, is not provided in the data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), the types and values of previous contracts they have held, and their success in managing costs and delivering on schedule under CPFF structures. As a small business, their experience might be more focused, and understanding their history with complex contract types like CPFF is essential for evaluating the risk associated with this award.
How does the annual contract value of approximately $522,000 compare to market rates for similar software development and management support services?
The annual contract value of approximately $522,000 for software application development and management support is moderate. Benchmarking this against market rates requires detailed knowledge of the specific services, required skill sets, geographic location (Washington D.C.), and the complexity of the 'Specturm' application. General market data suggests that specialized IT services in the D.C. area can command higher rates. However, for a small business prime contractor, this value could represent a significant engagement. A precise comparison would necessitate analyzing prevailing wage data, industry-specific IT service cost models, and rates for comparable government contracts, considering factors like labor categories, overhead, and profit margins.
What are the potential risks associated with the five-year duration of this contract, particularly concerning technological obsolescence or changing requirements?
A five-year duration for a software development and management contract carries inherent risks, primarily related to technological obsolescence and evolving requirements. Software technologies, programming languages, and cybersecurity best practices change rapidly. By the end of the five-year term, the 'Specturm' application and its underlying architecture might be based on outdated technology, requiring significant modernization efforts or even a complete re-architecture. Furthermore, NASA's mission needs and strategic priorities could shift over five years, rendering the original requirements for 'Specturm' less relevant or necessitating substantial modifications. The CPFF structure might mitigate some cost risks associated with changes, but the agency must actively manage the contract to ensure the software remains relevant and effective throughout its lifecycle.
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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Arctic Slope Regional Corporation
Address: 350 VOYAGER WAY STE 100B, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35806
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $2,610,222
Exercised Options: $2,610,222
Current Obligation: $2,610,222
Actual Outlays: $2,380,837
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80HQTR21D0003
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2021-04-01
Current End Date: 2026-03-31
Potential End Date: 2026-03-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-02-13
More Contracts from Agile Decision Sciences, LLC
- CS Support Services of Major Programs — $143.2M (Department of Defense)
- Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Solicitation Peer Review Program Portfolio Support — $102.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Cybersecurity Support Services — $54.5M (Department of Defense)
- Nress-Ii Management and IT Support — $50.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 402 Software Engineering Group (sweg) Software Support Services — $46.7M (Department of Defense)
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 →