NASA's $33.6M R&D contract with Sunpower, Inc. for propulsion and power systems spanned 8 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $33,654,752 ($33.7M)

Contractor: Sunpower, Inc

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2003-08-01

End Date: 2011-02-28

Contract Duration: 2,768 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 99

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: PROPULSION & POWER

Place of Performance

Location: ATHENS, ATHENS County, OHIO, 45701

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $33.7 million to SUNPOWER, INC for work described as: PROPULSION & POWER Key points: 1. The contract's duration and cost suggest a significant investment in advanced propulsion and power technologies. 2. The research and development focus indicates potential for future technological advancements in aerospace. 3. The use of a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type implies that costs were monitored, but flexibility was needed for R&D. 4. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust market for these specialized services. 5. The absence of small business set-asides may indicate a focus on large, specialized contractors for this R&D effort. 6. The contract's performance period ended in 2011, providing historical data for current benchmarking.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this contract's value is challenging due to its age and specialized R&D nature. The total award of $33.6 million over nearly 8 years averages to approximately $4.2 million annually. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, it's difficult to assess value for money. However, R&D contracts often have higher per-unit costs due to innovation and uncertainty. Comparing it to similar NASA propulsion R&D contracts from the early 2000s would be necessary for a more precise assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that NASA sought proposals from all responsible sources. The number of bidders is not specified, but this approach generally fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and innovation. The open competition suggests that the market for propulsion and power R&D services was considered sufficiently robust to support multiple interested parties.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers likely benefited from a competitive process that aimed to secure the best value for NASA's research objectives, potentially driving down costs and improving the quality of the developed technologies.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are NASA and the broader aerospace sector, through advancements in propulsion and power systems. The services delivered were research and development, aimed at improving existing or creating new technologies. The geographic impact is national, with potential applications extending to space exploration and related industries. Workforce implications include highly skilled scientists, engineers, and technicians involved in cutting-edge 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. The aerospace industry, a significant consumer of R&D, relies heavily on advancements in propulsion and power systems. Comparable spending in this area by agencies like NASA and the Department of Defense is substantial, reflecting the high cost and complexity of developing cutting-edge aerospace technologies. The market for such specialized R&D is often dominated by a few key players with proven expertise.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This is common for large-scale, complex R&D efforts that may require specialized expertise and resources typically found in larger corporations. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans, but it's possible that smaller, specialized firms could have been involved as subcontractors to Sunpower, Inc.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers. As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, financial oversight would focus on ensuring costs were reasonable and allocable to the contract, while the fixed fee provides a defined profit margin. Transparency would be expected through regular reporting from the contractor. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply for investigations into fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

nasa, research-and-development, propulsion-and-power, definitive-contract, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, ohio, aerospace, historical-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $33.7 million to SUNPOWER, INC. PROPULSION & POWER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SUNPOWER, 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 $33.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-08-01. End: 2011-02-28.

What was the specific technological advancement or outcome expected from this contract?

The provided data does not detail the specific technological advancements or outcomes expected from this contract. However, given the 'PROPULSION & POWER' description and the 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' NAICS code (541710), the contract likely aimed to develop or improve technologies related to spacecraft propulsion systems, power generation for space applications, or related energy conversion and storage mechanisms. Further investigation into NASA's research priorities during the 2003-2011 period, particularly within the relevant directorates, would be necessary to ascertain the precise objectives and expected deliverables.

How does the average annual spending of $4.2 million compare to similar NASA R&D contracts in propulsion and power during that era?

Directly comparing the average annual spending of $4.2 million for this Sunpower, Inc. contract to similar NASA R&D contracts from 2003-2011 requires access to a comprehensive database of historical NASA contracts. However, R&D in specialized fields like propulsion and power is inherently costly due to the need for advanced materials, testing facilities, and highly skilled personnel. Annual R&D budgets for major aerospace projects can range from a few million to tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Without specific benchmarks for comparable propulsion and power R&D efforts from that period, it's difficult to definitively state whether $4.2 million annually was high, low, or average. It suggests a significant, but not necessarily outlier, level of investment for a multi-year R&D initiative.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones used to assess Sunpower, Inc.'s progress and success?

The provided summary data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or milestones that were used to assess Sunpower, Inc.'s progress and success under this contract. For Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) R&D contracts, progress is typically monitored through technical reviews, progress reports, prototype demonstrations, and the achievement of specific research objectives or performance targets related to the propulsion and power systems being developed. NASA's program managers would have been responsible for evaluating the contractor's adherence to the research plan, the quality of the research conducted, and the potential for the developed technologies to meet future mission needs. A detailed review of the contract's statement of work and any associated performance requirements would be needed to identify the specific KPIs.

What is the track record of Sunpower, Inc. with NASA and other government agencies for R&D contracts?

The provided data identifies Sunpower, Inc. as the contractor for this specific NASA contract. To assess their broader track record, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending.gov) for all contracts awarded to 'SUNPOWER, INC' across various agencies and contract types. This would reveal the volume, value, and nature of their past government work, including R&D efforts. Information on past performance, including any awards, disputes, or terminations, would be crucial for understanding their reliability and expertise in fulfilling government R&D requirements, particularly in complex areas like propulsion and power.

Given the contract ended in 2011, what is the relevance of this spending data for current federal procurement analysis?

While this contract concluded in 2011, its data remains relevant for several reasons. Firstly, it provides a historical benchmark for understanding NASA's investment in propulsion and power R&D over time. Analyzing trends in spending, contract types, and durations can reveal shifts in agency priorities and technological focus. Secondly, it offers insights into the market dynamics and contractor landscape for these specialized services during that period. Understanding past competition levels and award values can inform current procurement strategies. Finally, the technologies developed or advanced under this contract may still be foundational to current systems or future innovations, making the historical R&D investment contextually important.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: BASIC RESEARCH

Offers Received: 99

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Ametek Inc (UEI: 001345149)

Address: 182 MILL STREET, ATHENS, OH, 45701

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $34,660,639

Exercised Options: $34,660,639

Current Obligation: $33,654,752

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 2003-08-01

Current End Date: 2011-02-28

Potential End Date: 2011-02-28 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2016-11-04

More Contracts from Sunpower, Inc

View all Sunpower, Inc federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending