NASA's $15.6M contract for lab support services awarded to Raytheon Company, spanning over 5 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,595,000 ($15.6M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 1996-03-15

End Date: 2001-09-15

Contract Duration: 2,010 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE LABORATORY FOR ASTRONOMY AND SOLAR PHYSICS

Place of Performance

Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20771

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $15.6 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE LABORATORY FOR ASTRONOMY AND SOLAR PHYSICS Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the long-term nature of the contract and the specialized support required. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open process, suggesting potential for competitive pricing. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with the contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) allowing for performance-based incentives. 4. Performance context is tied to essential laboratory operations, crucial for scientific research. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within NASA's broader scientific and research support infrastructure.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $15.6 million over five years for specialized laboratory support services seems reasonable. Benchmarking against similar long-term, specialized scientific support contracts would provide a clearer picture of value. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for performance incentives, which can drive efficiency, but also requires careful oversight to ensure costs remain controlled and aligned with awarded fees.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of two bidders suggests a degree of competition, though the exact number of interested parties and the intensity of the bidding process are not detailed. A competitive process generally helps in achieving fair market pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best value for specialized scientific support services, preventing potential overpricing that could occur with less competitive or sole-source awards.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are NASA's scientists and researchers at the Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar Physics, who receive essential support for their work. Services delivered include critical support functions necessary for the operation and maintenance of advanced laboratory equipment and research activities. The geographic impact is concentrated in Maryland, where the laboratory is located. Workforce implications involve the employment of skilled personnel to provide these specialized support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically supporting scientific research and development for NASA. The market for specialized scientific support services is competitive, with a mix of large defense contractors and niche scientific service providers. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other NASA contracts for similar laboratory operations or R&D support, as well as contracts from other federal agencies funding advanced scientific research.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a large contractor, Raytheon Company. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved in subcontracting opportunities within this contract, which could impact the broader small business ecosystem supporting federal R&D efforts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure necessitates regular performance reviews and audits to ensure that award fees are justified and that costs are reasonable. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms, though specific details of ongoing oversight activities are not publicly detailed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

nasa, raytheon-company, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, research-and-development, laboratory-support, scientific-services, maryland, aerospace, large-business

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $15.6 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE LABORATORY FOR ASTRONOMY AND SOLAR PHYSICS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON COMPANY.

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 $15.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1996-03-15. End: 2001-09-15.

What is Raytheon Company's track record with NASA for similar support services?

Raytheon Company, now RTX, has a long and extensive history of contracting with NASA and other federal agencies for a wide range of services, including aerospace engineering, mission support, and scientific research support. Their track record with NASA often involves large, complex contracts requiring specialized technical expertise. While specific performance metrics for this particular contract are not detailed here, Raytheon's general experience suggests a capacity to handle such requirements. However, a deeper dive into past performance evaluations, any past disputes, or contract modifications for similar NASA contracts would provide a more nuanced understanding of their specific performance history relevant to this award.

How does the $15.6 million value compare to similar NASA laboratory support contracts?

The $15.6 million total contract value over approximately five years (from March 1996 to September 2001) for specialized laboratory support services at NASA's Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar Physics is difficult to benchmark precisely without more granular data on the scope of services and market rates at the time. However, for long-term, specialized scientific support, this figure appears to be within a reasonable range. Comparable contracts would likely involve other NASA centers or agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) or Department of Energy (DOE) that fund similar advanced research. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure also means the final cost could vary based on performance, making direct comparisons challenging without knowing the final awarded fees.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for R&D support?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for R&D support include potential for cost overruns and contractor inefficiency if not managed diligently. While the 'award fee' component incentivizes performance, the 'cost plus' aspect means the government reimburses allowable costs plus a fee that is earned based on performance. This can lead to less price sensitivity from the contractor compared to fixed-price contracts. For NASA, risks include ensuring that the awarded fees accurately reflect exceptional performance and that costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract. Robust oversight, clear performance metrics, and regular evaluations are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure value for taxpayer money.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' approach for specialized scientific support contracts?

The 'full and open competition' approach is generally considered the most effective method for securing specialized scientific support contracts, as it maximizes the pool of potential bidders and encourages competitive pricing. For NASA's Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar Physics, this approach likely led to proposals from multiple qualified firms, allowing NASA to select the best technical solution at a competitive price. The presence of two bidders in this specific case indicates some level of competition, though a higher number of bidders might have yielded even greater price pressure. The effectiveness is ultimately measured by the quality of services received, the innovation fostered, and the overall value achieved for the investment.

What are the historical spending patterns for laboratory support services at NASA?

Historical spending patterns for laboratory support services at NASA typically show a consistent need for specialized technical and operational support across various research centers. These contracts are often long-term due to the specialized nature of the work and the need for continuity in research projects. Spending levels can fluctuate based on NASA's overall budget allocations, specific mission priorities, and the lifecycle of research programs. Contracts like this one, supporting specific laboratories, are a recurring component of NASA's operational budget, reflecting the agency's commitment to maintaining cutting-edge research infrastructure and capabilities.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Address: 22270 PACIFIC BLVD STE 600, DULLES, VA, 20166

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 1996-03-15

Current End Date: 2001-09-15

Potential End Date: 2001-09-15 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2023-06-03

More Contracts from Raytheon Company

View all Raytheon Company federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending