NASA's $88M peer review contract to Global Science & Technology, LLC, awarded in 2000, ran for 5 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $88,134,868 ($88.1M)
Contractor: Global Science & Technology, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2000-02-15
End Date: 2005-02-16
Contract Duration: 1,828 days
Daily Burn Rate: $48.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: CONSOLIDATED PEER REVIEW SUPPORT SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20546, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $88.1 million to GLOBAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, LLC for work described as: CONSOLIDATED PEER REVIEW SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract utilized a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, which incentivizes contractor performance through award fees tied to specific objectives. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, this contract saw 6 bidders, suggesting a competitive market for these specialized services. 3. The duration of 1828 days (approximately 5 years) indicates a long-term need for the consolidated peer review support services. 4. The contract's performance period spanned from February 2000 to February 2005. 5. The base contract value was $48.2M, with the total award reaching $88.1M, indicating significant performance-based incentives were earned. 6. The contract was awarded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and administered by the same agency. 7. The contract was awarded in the District of Columbia.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's total award of $88.1M significantly exceeded its base value of $48.2M, indicating strong performance that earned substantial award fees. This suggests the contractor effectively met or exceeded performance expectations. Benchmarking against similar peer review support contracts is challenging without more specific service details, but the significant increase from base to award value implies good value delivery through performance incentives.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded through full and open competition, with six bidders vying for the opportunity. This level of competition is generally positive, suggesting that multiple capable firms were interested and that the government had a range of options to choose from. The presence of six bidders implies a healthy market for these services and likely contributed to price discovery, although the CPAF structure means the final cost is performance-dependent.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process like this generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing and ensuring that the government selects the best value offering. The multiple bids suggest that taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently to secure these critical support services.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries of this contract are NASA's research and development programs, which rely on expert peer review to ensure scientific integrity and quality. The services delivered likely involved managing and facilitating the peer review process for various NASA scientific and technical proposals or publications. The contract's geographic impact is centered in the District of Columbia, where it was awarded and likely administered. The contract supported specialized technical and scientific expertise, potentially impacting the broader scientific community through the quality of NASA's research outcomes.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, while incentivizing, can lead to higher overall costs if award fees are consistently maximized without strict cost controls.
- The significant difference between the base award ($48.2M) and the total award ($88.1M) warrants scrutiny to ensure award fees were tied to truly exceptional performance and not just meeting minimum requirements.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition with six bidders indicates a robust and competitive market for these services.
- The substantial earned award fees suggest the contractor, Global Science & Technology, LLC, likely delivered high-quality performance and met or exceeded contract objectives.
- The long contract duration (5 years) implies a sustained need and successful delivery of services over an extended period.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically supporting government research and development oversight. The market for such services involves firms with expertise in scientific evaluation, program management, and administrative support for technical reviews. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within NASA's broader R&D support budget or similar agencies requiring extensive peer review processes for grant applications or research findings.
Small Business Impact
The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a specific set-aside requirement (ss: false, sb: false). There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses within the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific contract is not detailed, though larger prime contractors often engage small businesses for specialized support.
Oversight & Accountability
The contract was administered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Oversight mechanisms would typically involve contract officers, technical monitors, and potentially an Inspector General's office to ensure compliance with terms, cost accountability, and performance standards. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance reviews and award fee determinations are often internal.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Support Services
- Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
- Federal Grant and Proposal Review Management
- Aerospace Research Support Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost growth due to CPAF structure
- Need for robust oversight to ensure award fees are justified
- Risk of evolving requirements over a long contract duration
Tags
nasa, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, research-and-development, contract-administration, district-of-columbia, large-contract, multi-year-contract, peer-review-support
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $88.1 million to GLOBAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, LLC. CONSOLIDATED PEER REVIEW SUPPORT SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GLOBAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 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 $88.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2000-02-15. End: 2005-02-16.
What was the specific nature of the 'consolidated peer review support services' provided under this contract?
The provided data does not detail the specific nature of the 'consolidated peer review support services.' However, in the context of NASA, such services typically involve managing the process of evaluating scientific and technical proposals, research findings, or program plans. This includes identifying and recruiting qualified peer reviewers, facilitating the submission and review of documents, tracking review progress, and compiling reviewer feedback. The 'consolidated' aspect suggests these services may have been centralized across multiple NASA directorates or programs, aiming for efficiency and standardization in the review process. The significant award fees earned by Global Science & Technology, LLC imply they successfully managed these complex logistical and administrative tasks effectively.
How did the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure influence the final cost and contractor performance?
The CPAF structure is designed to incentivize contractor performance by allowing for a base fee plus an additional award fee based on achieving specific performance objectives. In this case, the base contract value was $48.2M, but the total award reached $88.1M. This substantial increase indicates that Global Science & Technology, LLC earned significant award fees, suggesting they met or exceeded performance expectations set by NASA. While CPAF can lead to higher total costs compared to fixed-price contracts, it is often used for complex services where performance is difficult to define precisely upfront. The structure aims to ensure value for money by rewarding superior performance, but it requires robust oversight to ensure award fees are justified and not merely incremental increases for meeting basic requirements.
What does the competition level (6 bidders) suggest about the market for these services?
The fact that six bidders competed for this contract indicates a healthy and competitive market for consolidated peer review support services relevant to NASA's needs. A higher number of bidders generally suggests that the government has a wider pool of qualified contractors to choose from, which can lead to better pricing and service quality. It implies that the barriers to entry for firms capable of providing these specialized services are not excessively high, and that multiple companies possess the necessary expertise and resources. This level of competition likely contributed to NASA's ability to secure a capable contractor and potentially influenced the initial pricing strategies of the bidders.
Can the value for money be assessed given the significant difference between base and total award amounts?
Assessing the value for money requires understanding the performance criteria tied to the award fees. The base contract was $48.2M, and the total award was $88.1M, meaning approximately $39.9M was paid in award fees. This substantial amount suggests that Global Science & Technology, LLC achieved a high level of performance as defined by NASA. If these award fees were tied to demonstrably superior outcomes, efficiency gains, or critical support that significantly advanced NASA's mission objectives, then the value for money could be considered excellent. However, without detailed insight into the specific performance metrics and award fee structure, it's difficult to definitively conclude. The CPAF structure inherently allows for higher total costs when performance is strong, so the 'value' is in the quality and impact of that performance relative to the cost.
What are the potential risks associated with a 5-year contract for peer review support services?
A significant risk with a long-term contract like this (1828 days) is the potential for scope creep or evolving requirements that may not be adequately captured in the initial contract terms, potentially leading to cost overruns if not managed carefully. Another risk is contractor complacency; while the CPAF structure incentivizes performance, there's always a possibility that performance could decline over time if oversight weakens. Furthermore, the market for scientific and technical expertise can evolve, and a long-term contract might lock NASA into a specific approach or vendor, potentially missing out on newer, more innovative solutions that emerge during the contract period. Ensuring continuous alignment with NASA's strategic priorities and technological advancements is crucial.
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Contractor Details
Address: 7855 WALKER DR STE 200, GREENBELT, MD, 20770
Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $146,965,000
Exercised Options: $146,965,000
Current Obligation: $88,134,868
Timeline
Start Date: 2000-02-15
Current End Date: 2005-02-16
Potential End Date: 2005-02-16 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-10-08
More Contracts from Global Science & Technology, LLC
- Business Operation Support Task Order Award — $54.5M (Department of Commerce)
- Scientific, Computer, & Research & Development Support Services — $29.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Ocean Science Technology Applications Task 2.0 (osta 2.0) — $28.4M (Department of Commerce)
- Task Order — $22.3M (Department of Commerce)
- Professional Scientific and Technical Services "closely Associated" - Igf::cl::igf — $20.3M (Department of Commerce)
View all Global Science & Technology, LLC federal contracts →
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 →