NASA's $67M logistics contract to URS Federal Technical Services, Inc. spanned nearly a decade
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $67,348,587 ($67.3M)
Contractor: URS Federal Services, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2003-04-01
End Date: 2012-03-26
Contract Duration: 3,282 days
Daily Burn Rate: $20.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 99
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: EG&G LOGISTICS SERVICES AT GEORGE C MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER URS FEDERAL TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. THIS CONTRACT WAS AWARDED TO URS FEDERAL TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. IN ORDER TO ACQUIRE A BROAD RANGE OF LOGISTIC SERVICES ON APRIL 1, 2003. THE CONTRACT IS A PERFORMANCE-BASED ORDER THAT PROVIDES TWO BASIC METHODS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THESE SERVICES; FIRM-FIXED-PRICE (FFP) LUMP SUM, AND INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) WORK.
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35812
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $67.3 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC. for work described as: EG&G LOGISTICS SERVICES AT GEORGE C MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER URS FEDERAL TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. THIS CONTRACT WAS AWARDED TO URS FEDERAL TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. IN ORDER TO ACQUIRE A BROAD RANGE OF LOGISTIC SERVICES ON APRIL 1, 2003. THE CONTRACT IS A PERFORMANCE-BASED ORD… Key points: 1. The contract aimed to provide a broad range of logistics services, indicating a significant operational support role. 2. A mix of firm-fixed-price and IDIQ task orders suggests flexibility in service delivery and cost management. 3. The contract's duration of over 9 years points to a long-term need for these logistics capabilities. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, this suggests a robust market for such services. 5. The contract's performance-based nature implies a focus on achieving specific outcomes rather than just inputs. 6. The absence of small business set-asides may indicate the scale or specialized nature of the required services.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's total value of approximately $67.3 million over nearly 10 years suggests a substantial investment in logistics support. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale, long-term logistics contracts for federal agencies would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The performance-based structure, utilizing firm-fixed-price and IDIQ orders, is a positive indicator of an effort to align costs with achieved performance. Without specific unit cost data or comparisons to industry benchmarks for similar services at NASA or other agencies, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the structure suggests a reasonable approach.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors were likely invited to bid. The fact that it was competed broadly suggests a healthy market for comprehensive logistics services. The number of bidders is not specified, but full and open competition generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more competitive pricing for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition awards. This approach allows the government to select the offer that best meets its technical requirements and cost objectives.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices due to market forces and the selection of the most capable and cost-effective provider. This process aims to ensure that federal funds are used efficiently by leveraging the competitive landscape.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's George C. Marshall Space Flight Center and potentially other NASA facilities requiring integrated logistics support. Services delivered likely encompass warehousing, inventory management, transportation, supply chain optimization, and equipment maintenance. The geographic impact is centered on Alabama, where the Marshall Space Flight Center is located, but could extend to other locations receiving or shipping goods. Workforce implications include direct employment by URS Federal Technical Services, Inc. and its subcontractors, as well as indirect support for NASA personnel relying on these services.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long-term contracts can sometimes lead to complacency or reduced incentive for innovation if not managed proactively.
- Reliance on a single large contractor for critical logistics functions could pose a risk if the contractor faces financial or operational difficulties.
Positive Signals
- The performance-based nature of the contract encourages the contractor to focus on achieving measurable outcomes and efficiencies.
- Full and open competition suggests a competitive environment that should drive better service quality and pricing.
- The extended duration indicates a stable, ongoing need and potentially a successful, long-term partnership.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on logistics and supply chain management. The market for federal logistics services is substantial, with numerous companies offering specialized capabilities. NASA, as a major federal agency, requires sophisticated logistics to manage its complex operations, from research equipment to space mission hardware. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large federal contracts for logistics support across agencies like the Department of Defense or Department of Energy, considering the scale and scope of services.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the scope and complexity of the required logistics services were likely beyond the capacity or specific requirements targeted for small business participation. Consequently, there may be limited direct subcontracting opportunities for small businesses unless URS Federal Technical Services, Inc. proactively sought them out. The impact on the small business ecosystem is minimal in terms of direct set-aside awards, but potential indirect impacts could arise if small businesses are part of the larger contractor's supply chain.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with NASA contracting officers and program managers at the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center. Accountability measures are embedded in the performance-based contract structure, requiring URS Federal Technical Services, Inc. to meet defined service levels and objectives. Transparency is typically facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though detailed performance metrics may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Logistics Management Services
- Federal Supply Chain Management Contracts
- Department of Defense Logistics Support Contracts
- General Services Administration (GSA) Schedule Contracts for Logistics
Risk Flags
- Long-term contract duration may reduce flexibility for future technological adoption.
- Reliance on a single primary contractor for critical logistics functions.
- Potential for scope creep in IDIQ task orders if not tightly managed.
Tags
nasa, logistics-services, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, alabama, full-and-open-competition, firm-fixed-price, idiq, performance-based-contract, large-contract, space-flight, supply-chain-management
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $67.3 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC.. EG&G LOGISTICS SERVICES AT GEORGE C MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER URS FEDERAL TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. THIS CONTRACT WAS AWARDED TO URS FEDERAL TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. IN ORDER TO ACQUIRE A BROAD RANGE OF LOGISTIC SERVICES ON APRIL 1, 2003. THE CONTRACT IS A PERFORMANCE-BASED ORDER THAT PROVIDES TWO BASIC METHODS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THESE SERVICES; FIRM-FIXED-PRICE (FFP) LUMP SUM, AND INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) WORK.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is URS FEDERAL SERVICES, 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 $67.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-04-01. End: 2012-03-26.
What was the contractor's track record prior to and during this contract?
Information on URS Federal Technical Services, Inc.'s specific track record prior to and during this NASA contract is not detailed in the provided data. However, as a subsidiary of AECOM (formerly URS Corporation), the company generally has a broad portfolio of government contracting experience across various sectors, including logistics, engineering, and technical services. Federal procurement databases would typically contain performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) for contracts held by URS Federal Technical Services, Inc. These evaluations would offer insights into their past performance regarding quality, timeliness, cost control, and customer satisfaction. Without access to these specific evaluations for this contract, it's difficult to provide a detailed assessment of their performance beyond the contract's structural indicators.
How does the total contract value compare to similar logistics contracts at NASA or other federal agencies?
The total contract value of approximately $67.3 million over nearly 10 years equates to an average annual value of roughly $6.7 million. This figure is moderate for large-scale federal logistics contracts. For instance, major Department of Defense logistics contracts can run into billions of dollars annually. However, for a specific NASA center like Marshall Space Flight Center, this value could represent a significant portion of their operational support budget. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze contracts with similar scopes (e.g., comprehensive logistics, supply chain management) awarded to other agencies or within NASA during the same period (2003-2012), adjusting for inflation and the specific services included. The contract's duration and performance-based structure are positive factors suggesting an effort towards value, but direct dollar-value benchmarking requires more extensive market data.
What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) and how was performance measured?
The provided data states this was a 'performance-based order' but does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or the exact measurement methodologies. Typically, performance-based contracts define specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) objectives. For logistics services, KPIs could include metrics such as on-time delivery rates, inventory accuracy, order fulfillment timeliness, cost per shipment, equipment uptime, and safety incident rates. The contract likely included Service Level Agreements (SLAs) outlining acceptable performance thresholds and potential incentives or penalties tied to meeting or failing these targets. NASA contracting officers would have been responsible for monitoring these KPIs and evaluating URS Federal Technical Services, Inc.'s performance against the contract requirements.
What is the historical spending pattern for logistics services at George C. Marshall Space Flight Center?
The provided data focuses solely on this specific $67.3 million contract awarded in 2003. It does not offer insights into the historical spending patterns for logistics services at the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) before or after this contract period. To understand historical spending, one would need to analyze procurement data for MSFC over several years, identifying all contracts related to logistics, supply chain management, warehousing, and transportation. This analysis would reveal trends in spending levels, types of services procured, dominant contractors, and shifts in procurement strategies (e.g., from cost-plus to fixed-price, or changes in competition levels). This single contract represents a significant but isolated data point without broader historical context.
Were there any significant risks identified during the contract lifecycle, and how were they mitigated?
The provided data does not explicitly detail specific risks identified during the lifecycle of this contract or the mitigation strategies employed. However, general risks associated with large, long-term logistics contracts include supply chain disruptions (due to natural disasters, geopolitical events, or supplier issues), contractor performance failures, cost overruns (especially in IDIQ portions if not well-managed), technological obsolescence, and security vulnerabilities. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust contract oversight, regular performance reviews, contingency planning, diversification of suppliers (where applicable), clear communication channels, and strong relationship management between the government and the contractor. The performance-based nature and full and open competition suggest an effort to mitigate risks related to performance and cost.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Process, Physical Distribution, and Logistics Consulting Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 99
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE (M)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: AECOM Global II, LLC (UEI: 043271568)
Address: 900 CLOPPER RD STE 200, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $67,348,589
Exercised Options: $67,348,589
Current Obligation: $67,348,587
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-04-01
Current End Date: 2012-03-26
Potential End Date: 2012-03-26 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2012-07-23
More Contracts from URS Federal Services, Inc.
- Federal Contract — $282.0M (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $255.4M (Department of Defense)
- Rotary Wing Flight Training Services, Fort Rucker, AL — $254.4M (Department of Defense)
- THE Award of a Time and Materials Task Order Under ITS Multiple Award Schedule Contract Number Gs-10f-0038m for Aircraft Maintenance and Modification Services — $142.3M (General Services Administration)
- Request for Proposal for Logistics Support A-76 Study — $114.6M (Department of the Treasury)
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 →