NASA awards $4.26M contract for administrative management and general management consulting services to Grant Thornton LLP

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,261,857 ($4.3M)

Contractor: Grant Thornton LLP

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2024-06-21

End Date: 2026-06-19

Contract Duration: 728 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: MSD RMO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BUDGET FORMULATION AND THE EXECUTION OF THE SAFETY, SECURITY, AND MISSION SERVICES (SSMS) BUDGETS, AS WELL AS HQ END-USER SUPPORT FOR BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS.

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22209

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $4.3 million to GRANT THORNTON LLP for work described as: MSD RMO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BUDGET FORMULATION AND THE EXECUTION OF THE SAFETY, SECURITY, AND MISSION SERVICES (SSMS) BUDGETS, AS WELL AS HQ END-USER SUPPORT FOR BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS. Key points: 1. Contract awarded through a BPA Call, indicating a pre-negotiated agreement. 2. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests predictable costs for the agency. 3. The contract duration is 728 days, spanning approximately two years. 4. Services cover safety, security, and mission services budget formulation and execution. 5. End-user support for business and administrative systems is also included. 6. The contractor, Grant Thornton LLP, is a well-established professional services firm.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $4.26 million for two years of administrative management and general management consulting services appears reasonable given the scope. While direct comparisons are difficult without specific service details, Grant Thornton LLP is a reputable firm known for providing such services. The firm fixed price structure helps manage cost predictability for NASA. Benchmarking against similar contracts for large federal agencies would provide a more precise value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this approach generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and service offerings for the government. The BPA Call mechanism implies that a broader competition may have occurred to establish the underlying agreement.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing the best value through a competitive bidding process, potentially driving down costs and improving service quality.

Public Impact

NASA's Management and Strategy Directorate (MSD) will benefit from improved budget formulation and execution. The contract supports the safety, security, and mission services critical to NASA's operations. End-users of business and administrative systems will receive enhanced support. The services contribute to the efficient functioning of NASA's administrative and business operations. The contract is geographically focused on NASA's headquarters in Virginia.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services sector (NAICS 541611). This is a broad category encompassing a wide range of advisory services aimed at improving organizational efficiency and effectiveness. The market for these services is large and competitive, with many firms, from large consultancies to smaller specialized providers, vying for government contracts. NASA's spending in this area supports its complex operational and administrative needs.

Small Business Impact

The contract indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) and 'sb' (small business) flags are false. This suggests the contract was competed broadly, and subcontracting opportunities for small businesses would depend on Grant Thornton LLP's internal policies and the specific needs of the services rendered. Further analysis of subcontracting plans would be needed to determine the direct impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers responsible for the MSD. The firm fixed price nature of the contract provides a degree of financial oversight. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases, though detailed performance reports may not be publicly available. The Inspector General's office would have jurisdiction over any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

consulting, administrative-management, general-management, nasa, grant-thornton-llp, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, bpa-call, virginia, budget-formulation, budget-execution, end-user-support

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $4.3 million to GRANT THORNTON LLP. MSD RMO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BUDGET FORMULATION AND THE EXECUTION OF THE SAFETY, SECURITY, AND MISSION SERVICES (SSMS) BUDGETS, AS WELL AS HQ END-USER SUPPORT FOR BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRANT THORNTON LLP.

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 $4.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-06-21. End: 2026-06-19.

What is Grant Thornton LLP's track record with NASA and other federal agencies for similar consulting services?

Grant Thornton LLP has a significant history of contracting with federal agencies, including NASA, for a variety of professional services, often including management consulting, financial advisory, and audit services. Their track record generally indicates experience in supporting large, complex organizations. Specific performance data for this particular type of service with NASA would require a deeper dive into contract performance reports and agency evaluations. However, as a large, established firm, they typically possess the resources and expertise to handle such engagements. Their past performance across various federal contracts can be reviewed through public databases like FPDS-NG, though detailed qualitative assessments are often internal to agencies.

How does the $4.26 million contract value compare to similar administrative management consulting contracts awarded by NASA or other large federal agencies?

Benchmarking the $4.26 million contract value requires comparing it against contracts with similar scopes of work, durations, and complexity. For a two-year engagement focused on budget formulation, execution, and end-user support for administrative systems at a major agency like NASA, this value appears within a reasonable range. Larger agencies often award multi-million dollar contracts for comprehensive management consulting. Without specific details on the deliverables and the number of personnel assigned, a precise comparison is challenging. However, considering the firm fixed price and the duration, the average annual cost is approximately $2.13 million, which is not unusually high for specialized consulting services supporting a federal agency of NASA's scale.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the success of this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics that will be used to evaluate the success of this contract. Typically, for administrative management and consulting services, KPIs might include timeliness of budget submissions, accuracy of financial reporting, efficiency gains in administrative processes, user satisfaction with end-user support, and adherence to project milestones. The contract's firm fixed price structure implies that performance will be monitored against defined deliverables and service levels outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW). NASA's contracting officer and program managers are responsible for establishing and tracking these metrics throughout the contract's lifecycle.

What is the potential risk associated with relying on Grant Thornton LLP for critical budget formulation and execution support?

The primary risk associated with relying on Grant Thornton LLP for critical budget formulation and execution support is potential performance failure or disruption. This could manifest as delays in budget submissions, inaccuracies in financial data, or inadequate support for administrative systems, all of which could impact NASA's operational continuity and mission effectiveness. Another risk is the potential for cost overruns if the scope is not well-defined or managed, although the firm fixed price contract mitigates this to some extent. Key personnel turnover at Grant Thornton could also pose a risk. NASA's oversight mechanisms, including regular progress reviews and performance monitoring, are crucial for mitigating these risks.

How has NASA's spending on administrative management and general management consulting services trended over the past five years?

Analyzing NASA's spending trends on administrative management and general management consulting services over the past five years would require accessing historical contract data. Generally, federal agencies utilize such consulting services to address specific needs related to efficiency improvements, strategic planning, financial management, and IT support. Spending in this category can fluctuate based on agency priorities, budget allocations, and the initiation of new strategic projects. Without specific historical data for NASA's NAICS code 541611, it's difficult to provide a precise trend. However, it is common for large agencies to maintain consistent, albeit variable, spending in this area to support ongoing operational and strategic objectives.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesAdministrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 171 N CLARK ST, CHICAGO, IL, 60601

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,261,857

Exercised Options: $4,261,857

Current Obligation: $4,261,857

Actual Outlays: $3,794,691

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 80HQTR20A0014

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline

Start Date: 2024-06-21

Current End Date: 2026-06-19

Potential End Date: 2026-06-19 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2026-03-11

More Contracts from Grant Thornton LLP

View all Grant Thornton LLP federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending