Leidos awarded $237.5M for International Space Station cargo missions, highlighting ongoing support needs
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $237,516,176 ($237.5M)
Contractor: Leidos, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2018-01-02
End Date: 2024-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,463 days
Daily Burn Rate: $96.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM'S CARGO MISSION CONTRACT 3
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77058
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $237.5 million to LEIDOS, INC. for work described as: INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM'S CARGO MISSION CONTRACT 3 Key points: 1. Contract value reflects sustained operational requirements for space station logistics. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding environment. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) incentivizes performance while managing costs. 4. Duration of over 2,000 days indicates a long-term commitment to service provision. 5. Focus on cargo missions underscores critical resupply and operational support for ISS. 6. The awardee, Leidos, has a significant presence in government contracting, suggesting established capabilities.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $237.5 million over approximately 2463 days (about 6.7 years) suggests an average annual spend of roughly $35.5 million. This figure needs to be benchmarked against historical ISS cargo resupply contracts and similar complex logistical support services for government programs. Without specific comparable contract data, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the sustained funding indicates perceived value by NASA.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This approach generally promotes price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government. The presence of two bids suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specialized service.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging innovative solutions from contractors.
Public Impact
Astronauts and ground crews aboard the International Space Station benefit from reliable resupply of essential goods, equipment, and scientific payloads. The contract ensures the continuity of critical cargo transportation services to and from the ISS. Scientific research conducted on the ISS is supported through the timely delivery of experiment materials and the return of samples. The contract supports a workforce involved in logistics, mission planning, and spacecraft operations, primarily within the aerospace sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Award Fee contracts can sometimes lead to higher final costs if award fees are consistently maximized without strict cost controls.
- The long duration of the contract may present risks related to evolving technological needs or changes in program priorities over time.
Positive Signals
- Award fee structure incentivizes contractor performance and efficiency.
- Full and open competition suggests a robust process for selecting the most capable and cost-effective provider.
- The contract's duration provides stability and predictability for essential ISS operations.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on space operations and logistics. The market for ISS cargo resupply is highly specialized, with a limited number of capable providers. Spending in this area is driven by government investment in space exploration and research, with comparable benchmarks often found in other large-scale government logistics and support contracts.
Small Business Impact
The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Given the specialized nature of ISS cargo missions, it is likely that prime contracting opportunities are limited to large, established aerospace firms. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved in the supply chain or as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
NASA's internal oversight mechanisms, including program management reviews and contract performance monitoring, are expected to ensure accountability. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure includes performance metrics that are evaluated to determine award fees, providing a degree of oversight on contractor performance. Transparency is generally maintained through NASA's public reporting and contract award databases.
Related Government Programs
- Space Station Research and Development
- Commercial Resupply Services (CRS)
- NASA Logistics and Mission Support
- International Space Station Operations
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration may introduce risks related to technological obsolescence or changing program requirements.
- Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires careful monitoring to ensure cost control and prevent excessive profit.
Tags
aerospace, space-exploration, nasa, international-space-station, logistics, cargo-transport, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-award-fee, leidos, texas
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $237.5 million to LEIDOS, INC.. INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM'S CARGO MISSION CONTRACT 3
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEIDOS, INC..
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 $237.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2018-01-02. End: 2024-09-30.
What is Leidos's track record with NASA and similar complex logistical contracts?
Leidos, Inc. has a substantial history of contracting with NASA and other federal agencies, often in areas related to information technology, engineering services, and mission support. The company has been involved in various aspects of space operations and scientific research support. Their experience with large-scale, complex programs suggests a capability to manage contracts of this magnitude. However, a detailed review of past performance on similar logistical contracts, including any past performance issues or commendations, would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment. This includes examining their history with cost management, schedule adherence, and technical execution on prior NASA contracts.
How does the annual spending on this contract compare to previous ISS cargo resupply efforts?
The approximate annual spend of $35.5 million for this contract needs to be compared against historical data for NASA's International Space Station (ISS) cargo resupply missions. NASA previously utilized programs like the Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contracts, which involved companies like SpaceX and Northrop Grumman (Orbital ATK). The pricing structures and scope of work for those contracts would serve as key benchmarks. Understanding if this $35.5 million annual figure represents an increase, decrease, or stable cost relative to previous resupply efforts, considering inflation and evolving mission requirements, is crucial for assessing value for money.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for space logistics?
Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contracts carry inherent risks, primarily related to cost control and potential for cost growth. While the 'cost plus' component covers allowable expenses, the 'award fee' is contingent on meeting or exceeding performance targets. A key risk is that if performance targets are set too low or if the evaluation criteria for award fees are not sufficiently rigorous, the contractor may receive significant award fees even if costs escalate. This can lead to a higher total contract price than anticipated. For space logistics, risks also include potential delays in delivery, technical failures of cargo vehicles, or unforeseen operational challenges that could impact both cost and performance, thereby affecting the award fee.
How effective is full and open competition in ensuring cost-effectiveness for specialized space support services like ISS cargo missions?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring cost-effectiveness, as it allows the government to solicit proposals from all responsible sources and select the best value. For specialized services like ISS cargo missions, this means multiple companies with the requisite technical capabilities can bid, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. However, the market for such highly specialized services is often limited, meaning the number of potential bidders might be small. Even with a limited number of bidders, the process itself provides a structured framework for comparing technical approaches and pricing, which is crucial for achieving cost-effectiveness in complex, high-stakes programs like the ISS.
What is the historical spending trend for NASA's ISS support services over the last decade?
Over the last decade, NASA's spending on International Space Station (ISS) support services, including cargo resupply, has been substantial and relatively consistent, reflecting the ongoing operational needs of the orbiting laboratory. Funding has been allocated towards maintaining the station, conducting scientific research, and ensuring the safety and well-being of the crew. Key areas of expenditure include cargo and crew transportation, station maintenance and upgrades, and ground support operations. While specific annual figures fluctuate based on program priorities and contract awards, the overall trend indicates a sustained, significant investment in the ISS program throughout its operational life. The shift towards commercial providers for cargo and crew transport has also influenced spending patterns.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: NNJ16591116R
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Address: 700 N FREDERICK AVE, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20879
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $238,384,764
Exercised Options: $238,384,764
Current Obligation: $237,516,176
Actual Outlays: $199,884,010
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 1
Total Subaward Amount: $67,592
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2018-01-02
Current End Date: 2024-09-30
Potential End Date: 2024-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-12-29
More Contracts from Leidos, Inc.
- Science Operation and Maintenance Support for the United States Antarctic Program — $3.1B (National Science Foundation)
- Provide Funding for Clin 302 for Pre-Flight and In-Flight Services. Contract Number Dtfawa-05-C-00031, Lockheed Martin. POP 01/16/08-03/31/08 — $1.9B (Department of Transportation)
- THE Facilities Development and Operations Contract(fdoc) Specifies Technical, Managerial, and Adminstrative Work Needed to Ensure the Availablitity, Integrity, and Reliability of Missionoperations Facilites Supporting National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa) Human Space Flight (HSF) Programs Requiring Mission Operations Support. the Objective of This Contract IS to Consolidate Efforts Across the Facilities Covered Under Fodoc in Order to Maximize Synergy for Hardware and Software Development, Modification, Sustaining. Maintenance, Reconfiguration, and Operations for the Purpose of Reducing Cost Without Compromising Facility Functionality and Performance. Nasa Will Collaborate With the Contractor on Developing Procedural and Technical Innovations That Improve Quality, Ensure Customer Satisfaction and Reduce Cost. Mission Operations Facilities Currently Support the Space Shuttle Programand the International Space Station Progra, Including International Partner and Commmercial Visiting Vehicles. Mission Operations Facilities Supporting the Cnstellation Program(cxp) ARE Continuously Under Development in Concert With CXP Formulation and Implementation. Fdoc Applies to the Facilities of These Three Programs, and ANY Other HSF Program Requiring Mission Operations Facility Support. in Addition, Future Mission Operations Facilities and Capabilities ARE Within the Technical Scope of This SOW, and Fdoc Worlk Associated With These Facilities Will BE Enabled Through Idiq — $1.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Airspace System (NAS) Implementation Support Contract (nisc). Provides Engineering and Technical Support Services to FAA Organizations Responsible for NAS Transformation, Integration and Implementation in the Areas of Implementation and Integration Planning, Transition Planning, Engineering Support, Environmental Support, Automation Support and Other Engineering and Technical Disciplines AS Required. TAS::69 8107::TAS — $1.1B (Department of Transportation)
- Itssc Task Order for Systems — $1.1B (Social Security 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 →