NASA's $230M IT services contract to Raytheon Company awarded in 2001, spanning over 9 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $230,790,379 ($230.8M)
Contractor: Raytheon Company
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2001-02-01
End Date: 2010-10-27
Contract Duration: 3,555 days
Daily Burn Rate: $64.9K/day
Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: CONSOLIDATED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: HAMPTON, HAMPTON CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23681
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $230.8 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: CONSOLIDATED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value of $230.8 million over its lifecycle suggests significant IT support needs. 2. Awarded to Raytheon Company, a major defense contractor, indicating a focus on established providers. 3. The contract's long duration (over 9 years) implies a need for sustained IT services. 4. Classified under Computer Systems Design Services (NAICS 541512), it covers a broad range of IT support. 5. The contract was a competitive delivery order, suggesting some level of market engagement. 6. Performance period extended significantly beyond the initial award date, indicating potential scope changes or extensions.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The total contract value of $230.8 million over nearly a decade averages to approximately $25.6 million per year. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, it's challenging to benchmark value for money. However, given the duration and the nature of IT services, this annual spend is within a plausible range for large-scale government IT support. Further analysis would require comparing specific service components and their pricing against industry standards and similar government contracts.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: unknown
This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that multiple vendors likely competed for the work. The presence of 4 bids suggests a moderate level of competition. While competitive, the specifics of the bidding process and the number of actual bidders are crucial for determining the extent of price discovery and potential savings.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally benefits taxpayers by fostering price competition, potentially leading to more cost-effective solutions. However, the true taxpayer benefit depends on the rigor of the competition and the final negotiated prices.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA by providing essential IT infrastructure and support services. Ensures the continuity and reliability of critical IT systems for agency operations. Supports a range of IT functions including computer systems design and integration. Likely impacts IT professionals and support staff within NASA's operational areas.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long contract duration may lead to vendor lock-in and reduced flexibility.
- Potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly due to the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure.
- Scope creep could increase the overall cost beyond initial projections.
- Reliance on a single large contractor might limit opportunities for smaller, innovative firms.
Positive Signals
- Competitive award process suggests potential for cost efficiencies.
- Award to a major contractor like Raytheon implies access to significant expertise and resources.
- The extended performance period indicates sustained need and potentially successful service delivery.
- The contract's classification under Computer Systems Design Services points to a structured approach to IT support.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Information Technology sector, specifically Computer Systems Design Services. The IT services market is vast and highly competitive, with significant government spending. Contracts of this size and duration are common for large federal agencies like NASA, which require robust and continuous IT support for their complex operations. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's total value and annual spend against similar IT service contracts awarded to other federal agencies or within the defense sector.
Small Business Impact
The contract details do not indicate any specific small business set-asides. As a large contract awarded to a major prime contractor, there may be subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. However, without specific subcontracting plans or goals, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear. Further investigation into subcontracting reports would be necessary to assess the extent of small business participation.
Oversight & Accountability
As a delivery order under a larger contract, oversight would typically be managed through NASA's contracting officer and program management teams. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type requires careful monitoring of costs and performance to ensure value. Transparency would be enhanced by public contract databases and potential Inspector General reviews, though specific oversight mechanisms for this particular order are not detailed.
Related Government Programs
- NASA IT Services Contracts
- Computer Systems Design Services
- Raytheon Company Contracts
- Large IT Service Contracts
- Federal IT Procurement
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure
- Potential for scope creep
- Extended performance period beyond initial award
Tags
it, nasa, virginia, competitive-delivery-order, large-contract, computer-systems-design-services, raytheon-company, cost-plus-fixed-fee, multi-year-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $230.8 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. CONSOLIDATED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
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 $230.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2001-02-01. End: 2010-10-27.
What was the specific scope of work for this contract, and how did it evolve over its extended performance period?
The contract, NAICS 541512, falls under Computer Systems Design Services. This typically encompasses a broad range of IT activities, including designing, developing, and integrating computer systems. Given its duration and award to Raytheon, it likely involved significant IT infrastructure management, software development, system maintenance, and potentially cybersecurity services for NASA. The extended performance period (from 2001 to 2010) suggests that the scope may have evolved to address changing technological landscapes, agency needs, or new projects. Without access to the contract's detailed statements of work and any modifications, the precise evolution of the scope remains speculative but would have been crucial for managing costs and ensuring alignment with NASA's mission objectives.
How does the total contract value of $230.8 million compare to similar IT services contracts awarded by NASA or other federal agencies during the same period?
A total contract value of $230.8 million over nearly a decade, averaging around $25.6 million annually, places this contract in the mid-to-large tier for federal IT services. During the early to mid-2000s, federal agencies were heavily investing in IT modernization and infrastructure. Comparable contracts for large-scale IT support, system integration, and managed services awarded by agencies like the Department of Defense or the General Services Administration often ranged from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. For instance, major IT support contracts for agencies with similar operational complexities could easily exceed this value. The key differentiator would be the specific services rendered and the complexity of the systems supported. This contract appears to be a significant, but not exceptionally outlier, investment in sustaining NASA's IT capabilities.
What were the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, and how were they managed?
Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts carry inherent risks, primarily the potential for cost overruns, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee. For the government, the risk is paying more than anticipated if costs escalate. For the contractor, the risk is that actual costs exceed the estimated costs, reducing their profit margin. Key risks for this contract would include scope creep, inefficient performance, and inadequate cost controls. Effective management would require rigorous oversight of contractor expenditures, regular performance reviews, strict change control processes to manage scope modifications, and clear communication channels between NASA and Raytheon. The fixed fee incentivizes the contractor to control costs to some extent, but the government bears the primary financial risk.
What was Raytheon Company's track record with NASA or similar federal agencies prior to or during the award of this contract?
Raytheon Company is a major defense contractor with a long history of providing complex technology solutions and services to the U.S. government, including NASA. Prior to and during the period of this contract (awarded in 2001), Raytheon was actively involved in numerous large-scale federal projects spanning aerospace, defense, and IT. Their extensive experience with government contracting, established infrastructure, and technical capabilities likely made them a strong contender for this IT services contract. NASA has a history of contracting with Raytheon for various mission-critical systems and support services. While specific performance details for this exact contract are not provided, Raytheon's general standing as a large, experienced federal contractor suggests a baseline capability to handle such requirements.
How did the number of bids (4) influence the pricing and terms of this competitive delivery order?
A competitive delivery order with 4 bids suggests a moderate level of competition. While more than a sole-source or limited competition scenario, 4 bidders might not represent the full spectrum of potential providers in the IT services market. The number of bids typically influences price discovery; a higher number of bids generally leads to more aggressive pricing as contractors vie for the award. With 4 bidders, NASA likely received a range of proposals, allowing for comparison and negotiation. However, the ultimate impact on pricing depends on the specific nature of the competition, the clarity of the requirements, and the evaluation criteria used. It's plausible that the pricing was competitive, but perhaps not as aggressively driven down as it might have been with a larger pool of bidders.
What are the implications of this contract's duration (over 9 years) on technological relevance and potential for innovation?
A contract duration spanning over nine years presents both opportunities and challenges regarding technological relevance and innovation. On the positive side, it allows for long-term planning, deep integration, and sustained support for critical systems, potentially leading to greater stability and efficiency. However, the rapid pace of technological change in the IT sector means that systems and solutions implemented early in the contract could become outdated by its end. This necessitates robust contract management to ensure technology refresh cycles, incorporate new innovations, and avoid obsolescence. The CPFF structure might also disincentivize radical innovation if it leads to unpredictable cost increases. NASA would need to actively manage the contract to ensure Raytheon was incorporating current best practices and emerging technologies, rather than simply maintaining legacy systems.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER
Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Rockwell Collins Australia PTY Limited
Address: 12160 SUNRISE VALLEY DR, RESTON, VA, 20191
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $298,022,152
Exercised Options: $298,022,152
Current Obligation: $230,790,379
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: GS00T99ALD0209
IDV Type: GWAC
Timeline
Start Date: 2001-02-01
Current End Date: 2010-10-27
Potential End Date: 2010-10-27 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-07-29
More Contracts from Raytheon Company
- Federal Contract — $5.7B (Department of Defense)
- TEN Fire Units for Qatar — $5.6B (Department of Defense)
- GPS Advanced Control Segment (OCX) Phase B Blocks 1 and 2 — $4.5B (Department of Defense)
- An/Spy-6(v) Hardware Production — $3.3B (Department of Defense)
- Predominant - Patriot UAE — $3.0B (Department of Defense)
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 →