NASA's $253M contract with SECTEK, INC. for IT services awarded in 1999, spanning over 4 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $25,378,440 ($25.4M)
Contractor: Sectek, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 1999-10-07
End Date: 2003-12-31
Contract Duration: 1,546 days
Daily Burn Rate: $16.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: IT
Place of Performance
Location: MOUNTAIN VIEW, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94035
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $25.4 million to SECTEK, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 3. The duration of over 4 years indicates a significant, long-term need for the services. 4. Awarded by NASA, a high-profile agency, suggesting critical IT support requirements. 5. The contract was awarded in 1999, providing historical context for IT service costs and delivery. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized, indicating the primary contractor was not a small business.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its age and the lack of specific performance metrics. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, while allowing flexibility, inherently carries a higher risk of cost escalation compared to fixed-price contracts. Without detailed breakdowns of costs and the fixed fee, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the competitive award process suggests an initial attempt at achieving a fair price.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 2 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this IT services contract. While two bidders participated, a higher number would typically indicate more robust price discovery and potentially better value for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process, even with two bidders, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging more favorable pricing and service offerings compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), receiving essential IT support services. Services delivered likely include IT infrastructure management, software development, or technical support critical to NASA's operations. The geographic impact is centered around NASA facilities, likely in California where the award was made. Workforce implications include direct employment for SECTEK, INC. staff and potential indirect impacts on NASA's internal IT workforce.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize contractors to incur costs, potentially leading to higher final prices than anticipated.
- The age of the contract (awarded 1999) makes direct comparison to current market rates difficult.
- Limited competition (2 bidders) may have resulted in a less optimal price than a more robustly competed contract.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, indicating an effort to maximize the pool of potential bidders.
- The contract duration suggests a sustained need and potentially a successful, long-term relationship with the contractor.
- Awarded to SECTEK, INC., which may have a track record of performance with NASA or other agencies.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) sector, specifically focusing on services likely related to IT infrastructure, software, or support. The IT services market is vast and dynamic, with significant government spending allocated to maintaining and modernizing federal IT systems. Contracts of this nature are crucial for agencies like NASA to operate their complex missions, manage data, and ensure cybersecurity. Benchmarking against similar IT service contracts from the late 1990s would be necessary for a precise value assessment.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false). This suggests that the procurement was open to businesses of all sizes, and the selected contractor, SECTEK, INC., was likely not classified as a small business for the purpose of this award. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, rigorous oversight of incurred costs and contractor performance would be essential to ensure compliance with the contract terms and prevent cost overruns. Transparency would be facilitated through regular reporting requirements mandated by the contract. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arose during the contract's performance.
Related Government Programs
- NASA IT Support Services
- Federal IT Procurement
- Cost-Plus Contracts
- Information Technology Services
Risk Flags
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
- Limited competition (2 bidders) may impact price discovery and value for money.
- Contract awarded in 1999, making direct comparison to current market rates challenging.
- Lack of specific performance metrics or outcomes makes assessing effectiveness difficult.
Tags
nasa, information-technology, it-services, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, california, 1999-award, multi-year-contract, it-support
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $25.4 million to SECTEK, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SECTEK, 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 $25.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 1999-10-07. End: 2003-12-31.
What was SECTEK, INC.'s performance history with NASA prior to this award?
Without access to historical performance evaluations or contractor databases from the period, it is difficult to ascertain SECTEK, INC.'s specific performance history with NASA before this contract's award in 1999. Generally, agencies assess past performance as a key factor in source selection. If SECTEK, INC. had a history of successful contract execution, timely delivery, and adherence to quality standards on previous NASA contracts, it would have positively influenced their bid. Conversely, a history of poor performance could have led to disqualification or a lower evaluation score. Further investigation would require accessing archived contract performance reports (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS, or its predecessors) if available.
How does the $253 million total value compare to similar NASA IT contracts awarded around 1999?
Comparing the $253 million value of this SECTEK, INC. contract to similar NASA IT contracts awarded around 1999 requires access to historical contract databases and market research from that specific period. IT spending and contract values were generally lower in the late 1990s compared to today. A contract of this magnitude would have been considered significant for IT services at the time. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify comparable contracts based on service scope (e.g., network management, software development, system integration), duration, and the specific IT needs of NASA centers during that era. Without such comparative data, it's challenging to definitively state whether $253 million represented a high, low, or average value for similar services.
What were the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract?
The primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract revolve around cost control and contractor incentive alignment. For the government, the main risk is cost overrun, as the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus a fixed fee. If the contractor's costs exceed initial estimates, the total contract price increases, potentially exceeding the government's budget. There's also a risk that the contractor may not be sufficiently incentivized to control costs rigorously, as their profit (the fixed fee) is predetermined. For the contractor, risks include underestimating costs, which could lead to a lower effective profit margin if the fixed fee is insufficient to cover unexpected expenses, or potential disputes over allowable costs.
How effective was the 'Full and Open Competition' in ensuring value for money given only two bids were received?
The effectiveness of 'Full and Open Competition' in ensuring value for money is somewhat diminished when only two bids are received. While the process itself is designed to maximize competition, a low number of bidders can indicate potential issues such as high barriers to entry, insufficient market research, or a lack of perceived opportunity by potential competitors. With only two bids, the government has less leverage to negotiate favorable terms and prices compared to a scenario with multiple competing offers. The resulting price might be acceptable but potentially not the best achievable value. A thorough analysis would require understanding why only two bids were submitted and evaluating the competitiveness of those specific bids.
What was the typical duration for NASA IT service contracts of this nature in the late 1990s?
The typical duration for NASA IT service contracts of this nature in the late 1990s often ranged from one to five years, with options for extensions. Contracts like this one, spanning over four years (1546 days), were substantial commitments reflecting the long-term nature of IT infrastructure and support needs. Factors influencing duration included the complexity of the services, the pace of technological change, and the agency's strategic planning cycles. Longer durations could offer stability and efficiency for both the agency and the contractor, but also carried risks of technology obsolescence or changing requirements. NASA, like other large federal agencies, often sought multi-year contracts to ensure continuity of critical IT operations.
What does the 'Award Type' (DCA) signify in the context of this contract?
The 'Award Type' (DCA) likely refers to a specific type of contract or award instrument used by the government, though 'DCA' itself is not a universally standard acronym for award type in federal procurement without further context. It could potentially stand for 'Delivery Contract Agreement,' 'Department of Defense Contract Audit Agency' related documentation, or another agency-specific designation. However, given the other data points (NASA, IT services, CPFF), it's most probable that DCA relates to the mechanism or vehicle through which the contract was awarded, possibly a pre-existing agreement or framework. Without explicit definition from the source data provider, its precise meaning remains ambiguous but generally indicates the formalization of the agreement.
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation ID: RFP2-36272(PBH)
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Contractor Details
Address: 11413 ISAAC NEWTON SQ S, RESTON, VA, 11
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $11,600,589
Exercised Options: $23,408,528
Current Obligation: $25,378,440
Timeline
Start Date: 1999-10-07
Current End Date: 2003-12-31
Potential End Date: 2003-12-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2010-09-20
More Contracts from Sectek, Inc.
- Protective Services Contract — $121.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Security Guard Services - Base Year. Contacts: Becky Morehart (procurement); Kevin Lewis (cotr) and JOE Burns (OAS) — $64.7M (Department of Commerce)
- Security Services — $39.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- FY04 Security Guard Services — $29.9M (Department of the Treasury)
- Security Services for Goddard Space Flight Center — $29.1M (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 →