NASA's $81.6M PICASSO-CENA contract to BAE Systems for R&D in physical sciences awarded non-competitively

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $81,575,972 ($81.6M)

Contractor: BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc.

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2000-02-15

End Date: 2015-07-10

Contract Duration: 5,624 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: PICASSO-CENA INSTRUMENTS, PAYLOAD AND GROUND SYSTEMS

Place of Performance

Location: BOULDER, BOULDER County, COLORADO, 80301, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $81.6 million to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC. for work described as: PICASSO-CENA INSTRUMENTS, PAYLOAD AND GROUND SYSTEMS Key points: 1. Contract awarded non-competitively, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies and market alternatives. 2. Significant duration of over 5,600 days suggests a long-term, complex research and development effort. 3. Cost-plus incentive fee contract type indicates shared risk and reward between NASA and the contractor. 4. Focus on Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences aligns with NASA's core mission objectives. 5. The contract's value, while substantial, needs to be benchmarked against similar R&D efforts to assess value for money. 6. Contractor BAE Systems is a major defense and aerospace player, suggesting capability but also potential for higher pricing.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of approximately $81.6 million over its extended period needs careful benchmarking. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to definitively assess if this represents fair market value. The cost-plus incentive fee structure allows for cost overruns to be shared, which can sometimes lead to less stringent cost control compared to fixed-price contracts. Comparing this to similar NASA R&D contracts for payload and ground systems would be crucial for a robust value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to competition from other potential bidders. This approach is typically justified when only one source possesses the necessary capabilities, technology, or when urgency dictates. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery mechanisms inherent in a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to higher costs.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bids, there's less assurance that the price reflects the lowest achievable cost for the required services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are NASA's scientific research programs, specifically those focused on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The contract supports the development of instruments, payloads, and ground systems essential for space exploration and scientific discovery. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, likely involving BAE Systems' facilities and NASA research centers. Workforce implications include highly skilled engineers, scientists, and technicians involved in advanced aerospace R&D.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This is a critical area for space agencies like NASA, driving innovation in instrumentation, spacecraft technology, and data analysis. The market for such specialized R&D services is often dominated by large aerospace and defense contractors due to the high technical expertise and infrastructure required. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other NASA R&D contracts for similar complex systems and scientific payloads.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) was false, and there was no specific small business set-aside (ss) mentioned. This suggests the contract was not structured to prioritize small businesses. Consequently, there are likely limited subcontracting opportunities for small businesses directly tied to this specific award, and its direct impact on the broader small business ecosystem in this sector may be minimal.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Specific oversight mechanisms would likely include program management reviews, technical evaluations, and financial audits, especially given the cost-plus incentive fee structure. Accountability measures would be tied to the achievement of performance milestones and cost targets outlined in the contract. Transparency might be limited due to the nature of R&D and sole-source awards, but NASA's Inspector General would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

nasa, research-and-development, space-and-mission-systems, sole-source, cost-plus-incentive-fee, physical-sciences, engineering, life-sciences, colorado, large-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $81.6 million to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC.. PICASSO-CENA INSTRUMENTS, PAYLOAD AND GROUND SYSTEMS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS 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 $81.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-02-15. End: 2015-07-10.

What specific scientific advancements or technological capabilities has this contract enabled for NASA?

The contract, 'PICASSO-CENA INSTRUMENTS, PAYLOAD AND GROUND SYSTEMS,' awarded to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC. by NASA, aimed to support research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences. While specific scientific advancements are not detailed in the provided data, such contracts typically contribute to the development of novel scientific instruments for space missions, advanced payload systems for data collection, and robust ground infrastructure for mission control and data processing. These developments are crucial for expanding our understanding of the universe, improving Earth observation capabilities, and enabling future space exploration endeavors. The long duration and significant funding suggest a focus on foundational research or the development of complex, long-term projects critical to NASA's scientific objectives.

How does the cost-plus incentive fee (CPIF) structure compare to other contract types used for similar R&D projects at NASA?

Cost-plus incentive fee (CPIF) contracts, like the one awarded to BAE Systems, are often used by NASA for complex R&D projects where the final costs are uncertain and performance targets are critical. In a CPIF contract, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee, but the fee is adjusted based on whether the final costs are below or above a target cost. This incentivizes the contractor to control costs while pursuing ambitious technical goals. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPIF offers more flexibility for R&D where requirements may evolve. However, it also carries a higher risk of cost overruns if not managed diligently, unlike fixed-price contracts which place more cost risk on the contractor. Other common R&D contract types include Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which offers less cost incentive, and firm-fixed-price (FFP) for projects with well-defined scopes.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for a contract of this magnitude and duration?

A sole-source award for a contract valued at over $81 million and spanning more than 15 years presents several potential risks. Firstly, the absence of competition means NASA may not have secured the most cost-effective solution, potentially leading to higher overall expenditures than if multiple bids were considered. Secondly, without competitive benchmarks, assessing the fairness of pricing and the contractor's performance incentives becomes more challenging. Thirdly, a sole-source situation can sometimes lead to complacency on the part of the contractor, as there is no immediate threat of losing future business to competitors. Finally, it raises questions about the thoroughness of the market research conducted by NASA to ensure that no other capable sources existed or could be developed.

Can the performance of BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc. on this contract be benchmarked against their other NASA contracts?

Benchmarking BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc.'s performance on this specific PICASSO-CENA contract against their other NASA contracts would require access to detailed performance data, such as on-time delivery, adherence to budget, and technical success rates for each contract. The provided data indicates this contract was a sole-source award with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure, running from February 2000 to July 2015. Without specific performance metrics (e.g., meeting milestones, cost variances, quality of deliverables) for this contract and comparable contracts held by BAE Systems with NASA, a direct performance comparison is not feasible. Generally, BAE Systems is a major contractor with extensive experience, but performance can vary significantly based on project complexity, management, and specific contract terms.

What is the historical spending trend for NASA's Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences, and how does this contract fit within it?

NASA's spending on Research and Development (R&D) in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences is a core component of its mission, consistently representing a significant portion of its overall budget. This $81.6 million contract, awarded in 2000 and ending in 2015, falls within the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' NAICS code (541710). While this specific contract represents a substantial investment, NASA's total R&D spending fluctuates annually based on congressional appropriations and strategic priorities. This contract likely supported specific, long-term projects within NASA's science directorates. To understand its place in the historical trend, one would need to analyze NASA's annual budget reports and contract databases to see how this award compares in size and scope to other R&D investments during that period and across different scientific disciplines.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesScientific Research and Development ServicesResearch and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTSpace R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Ball Corp (UEI: 006419147)

Address: 1600 COMMERCE ST, BOULDER, CO, 80301

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $-69,924,028

Exercised Options: $69,575,972

Current Obligation: $81,575,972

Timeline

Start Date: 2000-02-15

Current End Date: 2015-07-10

Potential End Date: 2015-08-11 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2016-04-19

More Contracts from BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc.

View all BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc. federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending