NASA awards $85M for business applications and sustaining engineering services to INDUS CORPORATION
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $84,950,743 ($85.0M)
Contractor: Indus Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2002-01-14
End Date: 2008-10-31
Contract Duration: 2,482 days
Daily Burn Rate: $34.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 15
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: BUSINESS APPLICATIONS AND SUSTAINING ENGINEERING SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGE'S County, MARYLAND, 20771
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $85.0 million to INDUS CORPORATION for work described as: BUSINESS APPLICATIONS AND SUSTAINING ENGINEERING SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a Cost Plus Award Fee basis, allowing for performance-based incentives. 2. The contract duration of 2482 days (approx. 6.8 years) suggests a long-term need for these services. 3. Awarded under full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a competitive process. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541519 covers 'Other Computer Related Services', placing this contract within the IT services sector. 5. The contract value of $84.95M over its term represents a significant investment in IT support for NASA. 6. The 'AWARD' action type indicates a contract award, not an amendment or modification. 7. The 'MD' (Maryland) state code suggests a primary performance location or contractor base in that region.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $84.95M over nearly 7 years averages to approximately $12.1M annually. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure suggests an intent to incentivize performance and achieve good value by linking contractor profit to meeting defined objectives. Benchmarking against similar IT sustaining engineering contracts for large federal agencies would be necessary for a more definitive assessment of pricing and value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, there might have been specific circumstances or prior exclusions that led to this particular phrasing. The presence of 15 bidders (no: 15) suggests a robust level of competition, which generally benefits price discovery and can lead to more favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process with 15 bidders is generally positive for taxpayers, as it increases the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and innovative solutions. This level of competition helps ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which receives essential business applications and sustaining engineering services. Services delivered likely include software development, maintenance, system integration, and technical support for NASA's critical business systems. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around NASA facilities, particularly in Maryland where the contractor is based. This contract supports a workforce of IT professionals and engineers, contributing to the skilled labor pool in the technology sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type can sometimes lead to higher costs if award fee criteria are not strictly managed, as it incentivizes the contractor to achieve high performance ratings.
- The specific details of the 'exclusion of sources' in the competition are not provided, which could obscure potential limitations in the competitive landscape.
- Without detailed performance data, it's difficult to ascertain if the maximum award fees were consistently earned, which impacts the overall cost-effectiveness.
Positive Signals
- The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating a broad solicitation and a significant number of bidders (15), which is a strong positive signal for competitive pricing.
- The Cost Plus Award Fee structure is designed to reward high performance, suggesting a focus on quality and efficiency in service delivery.
- The long contract duration (2482 days) implies a stable, long-term partnership, which can foster expertise and reduce transition costs.
- The contract is for essential business applications and sustaining engineering, indicating support for critical NASA operations.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) services sector, specifically 'Other Computer Related Services'. The IT services market for the federal government is substantial, with agencies like NASA requiring continuous support for complex business applications and infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing IT support contracts across various federal agencies, looking at contract values, durations, and service types. The market for sustaining engineering and business application support is characterized by a need for specialized technical expertise and a deep understanding of agency-specific requirements.
Small Business Impact
The contract indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration (ss: false, sb: false). While the contract itself was not set aside for small businesses, the prime contractor, INDUS CORPORATION, may engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill specific requirements. The extent of small business subcontracting is not detailed in the provided data, making it difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to understand this aspect.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Award Fee contract, performance monitoring and evaluation against defined award fee criteria would be crucial. NASA's contracting officers and technical representatives would be responsible for ensuring compliance with contract terms and conditions. Transparency would be facilitated through contract databases like FPDS-NG, though detailed performance reports are typically internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA IT Support Services
- Federal IT Services Contracts
- Business Application Development and Maintenance
- Sustaining Engineering Services
- Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
- IT Services for Aerospace Agencies
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure if not managed tightly.
- Risk of scope creep over the long contract duration.
- Dependency on contractor performance for critical business applications.
- Potential for technological obsolescence if not proactively managed.
Tags
it-services, nasa, indus-corporation, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, sustaining-engineering, business-applications, maryland, large-contract, it-support, computer-related-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $85.0 million to INDUS CORPORATION. BUSINESS APPLICATIONS AND SUSTAINING ENGINEERING SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is INDUS CORPORATION.
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 $85.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2002-01-14. End: 2008-10-31.
What is the track record of INDUS CORPORATION with NASA and other federal agencies for similar IT services contracts?
Assessing INDUS CORPORATION's track record requires a review of their past performance on contracts with NASA and other federal agencies. This would involve examining contract databases for awards, performance evaluations (if publicly available), and any reported disputes or terminations. For IT services, particularly sustaining engineering and business applications, a history of successful project completion, adherence to schedules and budgets, and positive client feedback are key indicators. Understanding their experience with Cost Plus Award Fee contracts would also be relevant, as it demonstrates their ability to meet performance-based incentives. A thorough review would aim to identify patterns of reliability, technical competence, and client satisfaction.
How does the awarded value of $84.95M compare to similar IT sustaining engineering contracts for federal agencies of NASA's size?
Benchmarking the $84.95M contract value requires comparing it against IT sustaining engineering contracts awarded to similar-sized federal agencies (e.g., other large civilian agencies or defense components) over comparable contract durations. Factors such as the scope of services (e.g., number of applications supported, complexity of systems), labor categories, and geographic locations of performance significantly influence pricing. If this contract provides a broad range of comprehensive services for critical NASA business systems, the value might be considered reasonable. However, without specific details on the service level agreements and the complexity of the systems supported, a definitive comparison is difficult. A detailed analysis would involve identifying comparable contracts and adjusting for differences in scope and market conditions.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract of this magnitude and duration?
The primary risks associated with a $84.95M CPAF contract over nearly 7 years include potential cost growth if award fee criteria are not rigorously defined and monitored, leading to the contractor receiving maximum profit without commensurate performance gains. There's also a risk of scope creep, where requirements expand beyond the initial agreement, potentially increasing costs. Contractor performance risk, such as failure to deliver services as expected or maintain system integrity, is another concern. Furthermore, the long duration increases the risk of technological obsolescence or changes in agency needs that may not be fully addressed by the contract. Effective oversight, clear performance metrics, and proactive contract management are crucial to mitigate these risks.
How effective has NASA been in managing its IT service contracts, and does this contract align with historical spending patterns?
NASA's effectiveness in managing IT service contracts can be assessed by reviewing Inspector General reports, GAO audits, and internal agency performance metrics related to IT spending and project success rates. Historically, large federal agencies often face challenges in managing complex IT contracts due to evolving technology, changing requirements, and the inherent difficulty in defining and measuring IT service performance. This $84.95M contract for business applications and sustaining engineering appears to align with typical federal IT spending patterns, where significant investments are made in maintaining and upgrading essential business systems. Analyzing NASA's historical IT budgets and the proportion allocated to sustaining services would provide context on whether this contract represents a typical or anomalous level of investment.
What are the implications of awarding this contract under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' for future procurements?
The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' designation suggests that while the competition was open, there might have been specific reasons for excluding certain potential offerors or types of sources initially. This could be due to specific technical requirements, prior relationships, or unique capabilities needed. For future procurements, this designation might signal to potential bidders that NASA has specific, perhaps niche, requirements that necessitate careful consideration of all capabilities. It could also imply that the agency is seeking to broaden its supplier base beyond traditional vendors if previous exclusions were found to be overly restrictive. Understanding the rationale behind the exclusion is key to interpreting its implications for future competition.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Other Computer Related Services
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 15
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1951 KIDWELL DRIVE, VIENNA, VA, 11
Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $92,468,901
Exercised Options: $92,468,901
Current Obligation: $84,950,743
Timeline
Start Date: 2002-01-14
Current End Date: 2008-10-31
Potential End Date: 2008-10-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2012-12-03
More Contracts from Indus Corporation
- Fhwa Federal Information Technology Support Services. Base 2-Years Task A: Estimated Cost: $2,675,112.00 Award FEE: $139,421.00 Estimated Total: $2,814,533.00 Potential Total Value of the Contract: $174,980,989.00 — $271.5M (Department of Transportation)
- EPA Office of Water (OW) IT Support Services Under Commits Nexgen — $29.5M (Environmental Protection Agency)
- THE Contractor IS Responsible for the Information Technology Security Requirements on ALL Hardware, System Software, and Applications Maintained, Developed, or Sustained Under This Contract. the Scope of This Effort Encompasses the Following Types of Support: - Program Management Services - Computer Operations Services - Business Infrastructure Support Services - Applications Development and Sustaining Engineering Services — $26.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Funding — $14.7M (Department of Defense)
- IT Support Services for the Criminal DIV — $11.3M (Department of Justice)
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 →