NASA's $157.5M contract for flight program support awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $157,530,324 ($157.5M)
Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2003-02-28
End Date: 2008-10-27
Contract Duration: 2,068 days
Daily Burn Rate: $76.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 8
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: SUPPORT FLIGHT PROGRAMS & PROJECT DIRECTORATE BY PROVIDING FOLLOWING FUNCTIONS: PLANNING AND SCHEDULING, CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, DOCUMENTATION/LIBRARY, GENERAL BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTING
Place of Performance
Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20771
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $157.5 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: SUPPORT FLIGHT PROGRAMS & PROJECT DIRECTORATE BY PROVIDING FOLLOWING FUNCTIONS: PLANNING AND SCHEDULING, CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, DOCUMENTATION/LIBRARY, GENERAL BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTING Key points: 1. Contract provides essential support functions including planning, IT, and business operations for flight programs. 2. Awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration of over 2000 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 5. This contract falls under Engineering Services (NAICS 541330), a common category for complex project support. 6. The geographic location of performance is Maryland (ST: MD).
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics. However, the total award value of $157.5 million over its duration suggests a significant investment in critical support functions for NASA's flight programs. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) pricing structure means the final cost could vary based on performance, making direct comparison to fixed-price contracts difficult. Further analysis would require understanding the specific services delivered and comparing them to industry standards for similar support roles.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while the competition was open, certain sources may have been excluded prior to the solicitation. This suggests a potentially competitive process, but the exclusion of sources warrants further investigation into the rationale. The number of bidders is not specified, which limits the assessment of the breadth of competition. A truly open competition typically involves multiple bidders vying for the contract, which can drive down prices and improve value.
Taxpayer Impact: While the competition was 'full and open,' the exclusion of sources might have limited the number of potential bidders, potentially impacting the most competitive pricing for taxpayers. The specifics of this exclusion are key to understanding the full competitive landscape.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's flight programs and project directorates, ensuring operational continuity and support. Services delivered include critical functions such as planning, scheduling, configuration management, IT support, documentation, and business/accounting operations. The geographic impact is primarily within Maryland, where the contract performance is located. Workforce implications include the employment of personnel with expertise in engineering, IT, project management, and administrative support.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The 'EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' in the competition type requires clarification to ensure maximum taxpayer value.
- Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contracts necessitate robust oversight to manage costs and ensure award fees are justified by performance.
- The long contract duration could lead to potential cost overruns if not managed diligently.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through a full and open competition process, indicating an effort to solicit a wide range of capable contractors.
- The contract supports critical flight programs, suggesting alignment with NASA's core mission objectives.
- The inclusion of IT and business functions indicates a comprehensive approach to program support.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a broad category encompassing a wide range of professional and technical services. The market for these services is substantial, driven by government agencies like NASA requiring specialized expertise for complex projects. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale support contracts awarded by NASA or other federal agencies for similar program management and technical support functions. The total value of this contract places it in the mid-to-large tier for such service agreements.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (SB: false). There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this information, it is difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. However, large prime contractors are often encouraged or required to have small business subcontracting goals on contracts of this magnitude, which could indirectly benefit small businesses.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, rigorous performance monitoring and financial oversight are crucial to ensure that award fees are earned based on demonstrated performance and that costs remain within acceptable parameters. Transparency would be enhanced through regular reporting requirements and potentially through NASA's Inspector General's office, which has jurisdiction over NASA programs and contracts to investigate fraud, waste, and abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Program Management Support Contracts
- Aerospace Engineering Services
- Federal IT Support Services
- Government Business and Accounting Services
- Project Directorate Support
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
- Need for clear performance metrics in CPAF.
- Rationale for source exclusion in competition needs review.
- Long contract duration requires diligent management.
Tags
nasa, engineering-services, flight-programs, project-support, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, kbr-wyle-services, maryland, it-support, program-management, definitive-contract, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $157.5 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. SUPPORT FLIGHT PROGRAMS & PROJECT DIRECTORATE BY PROVIDING FOLLOWING FUNCTIONS: PLANNING AND SCHEDULING, CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, DOCUMENTATION/LIBRARY, GENERAL BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTING
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC.
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 $157.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-02-28. End: 2008-10-27.
What specific functions are included under 'SUPPORT FLIGHT PROGRAMS & PROJECT DIRECTORATE'?
The contract details specify several key functions: Planning and Scheduling, Configuration Management, Information Technology, Documentation/Library services, and General Business and Accounting. These functions are critical for the successful execution and management of complex flight programs and projects. Planning and scheduling ensure timelines are met, configuration management maintains the integrity of program assets, IT provides necessary technological infrastructure, documentation serves as a record and knowledge base, and business/accounting functions handle financial and administrative aspects. Together, these services form a comprehensive support framework essential for NASA's operational endeavors.
How does the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) structure impact contractor incentives and government oversight?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure is designed to incentivize contractor performance by allowing the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a fixed base fee and an award amount. The award amount is determined by the government based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. This structure encourages contractors to go beyond minimum requirements to achieve higher performance levels, potentially leading to better outcomes for the government. However, it also necessitates robust government oversight to objectively evaluate performance, determine the appropriate award fee, and ensure that costs are reasonable and allocable. The government must establish clear, measurable performance metrics and a fair evaluation process to effectively manage CPAF contracts and ensure value for taxpayer money.
What is the significance of 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'?
This contract type indicates that the solicitation was open to all responsible sources, but specific sources were excluded prior to the solicitation. This is distinct from a standard 'full and open competition' where all sources are considered without prior exclusion. The exclusion of sources suggests that NASA may have had specific reasons for not considering certain entities, perhaps due to prior performance issues, specialized requirements, or other programmatic considerations. While it aims to ensure competition among eligible parties, the exclusion aspect warrants scrutiny to confirm that it did not unduly limit the competitive pool or potentially lead to higher costs for the government. Understanding the rationale behind the exclusion is key to assessing the true level of competition achieved.
What is the typical duration and value range for similar NASA flight program support contracts?
Contracts for supporting flight programs and project directorates at NASA can vary significantly in duration and value depending on the scope and complexity of the programs they support. The duration of this contract, approximately 2068 days (over 5.6 years), is substantial, reflecting a long-term need for consistent support. The award value of $157.5 million places it in the mid-to-large tier for such service contracts. Comparable contracts often range from a few years to over a decade in duration, with values potentially spanning hundreds of millions to billions of dollars for very large, multi-faceted support efforts. Benchmarking requires detailed comparison of the specific services, program criticality, and market conditions at the time of award.
How does the Engineering Services NAICS code (541330) relate to the services provided?
The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330, 'Engineering Services,' is highly relevant to the services provided under this contract. This code encompasses firms that provide architectural, engineering, and related services, including drafting services. The functions listed – planning, scheduling, configuration management, IT, documentation, and business/accounting support for flight programs – all fall under the umbrella of complex project management and technical support that requires engineering and technical expertise. This classification helps categorize the contract within the broader federal procurement landscape and allows for comparison with other contracts offering similar professional and technical services.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 8
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: KBR, Inc.
Address: 7701 GREENBELT RD STE 400, GREENBELT, MD, 20770
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $158,000,000
Exercised Options: $158,000,000
Current Obligation: $157,530,324
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-02-28
Current End Date: 2008-10-27
Potential End Date: 2008-10-27 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-08-30
More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC
- Bioastronautics Contract-Activities for the Health &productivity of Crews Working and Living in Space — $1.5B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Fpds-Ng Mission Systems Operations Contract (msoc) — $1.0B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE Purpose of This Contract IS to Acquire Engineering Services and Related Services to MSD and Related Organizations Throughout Gsfc, AS Required, for the Formulation, Design, Development, Fabrication, Integration, Testing, Verification, and Operations of Space Flight and Ground System Hardware and Software, Including Development and Validation of NEW Technologies to Enable Future Space and Science Missions. the Engineering Areas of Emphasis ARE Multidisciplinary With Concentration in the Mechanical Engineering Areas of Materials, Structural Analysis and Loads, Mechanical Design, Electromechanical Design, Thermal, Contamination and Coatings, Manufacturing and Integration and Test — $728.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200106!000121!1700!F7004 !marine Corps Logistics Base !M6700499C0002 !a!n!*!n!p00015 !20010228!20080930!041014242!041014242!139691877!n!honeywell Technology Solutions!7000 Columbia Gateway Driv!columbia !md!21046!35000!031!12!jacksonville !duval !florida !+000004292865!n!n!000000000000!j049!maint & Repair of Eq/Maintenance & Repair Shop EQ !a4a!combat Vehicles !2000!NOT Discernable or Classified !811310!*!*!3! ! !C!*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !N!J!2!006!B! !C!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!d!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $670.1M (Department of Defense)
- Mission Operations Management Services (moms) — $623.8M (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 →