Arizona State University contract for educational services valued at $615M over 4 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $6,150,555 ($6.2M)
Contractor: Arizona State University
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2022-06-02
End Date: 2026-07-31
Contract Duration: 1,520 days
Daily Burn Rate: $4.0K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 31
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: START UP/ENROLLMENT PERIOD
Place of Performance
Location: HYATTSVILLE, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20781
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $6.2 million to ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY for work described as: START UP/ENROLLMENT PERIOD Key points: 1. Contract provides educational services, aligning with institutional missions. 2. Competition was full and open, suggesting a potentially competitive pricing environment. 3. The contract duration of over 4 years indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. Fixed-price contract type may offer cost certainty but could limit flexibility. 5. The award to a university suggests a focus on specialized academic or research support. 6. Geographic scope includes Maryland, indicating a specific operational presence or requirement.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $615 million over approximately four years for educational services appears substantial. Benchmarking against similar contracts for university-based research or training programs would be necessary for a precise value assessment. However, the fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to control costs. The award to a large, established institution like Arizona State University may indicate a competitive bid process where they offered a strong value proposition.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. With 31 bids received, this suggests a robust level of interest and a competitive marketplace for these educational services. A high number of bidders generally supports the government's ability to secure favorable pricing and terms.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process with numerous bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it drives down prices and encourages innovation, ensuring the government receives the best possible value for its investment.
Public Impact
Benefits students and faculty through access to specialized educational programs and resources. Delivers advanced training and research support services to the Department of the Navy. Geographic impact is noted in Maryland, suggesting a localized operational requirement. Workforce implications include potential support for military personnel development and specialized skill acquisition.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for scope creep in long-term educational service contracts.
- Ensuring continued relevance of curriculum and training over the contract's lifespan.
- Monitoring performance to ensure alignment with evolving Navy educational needs.
Positive Signals
- Award to a reputable institution like Arizona State University suggests a high likelihood of quality service delivery.
- Full and open competition with 31 bidders indicates a strong market response and potential for competitive pricing.
- Fixed-price contract type provides cost predictability for the government.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Higher Education sector, specifically focusing on services provided by universities to government entities. The market for educational services to the Department of Defense is significant, encompassing training, research, and development support. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts awarded to universities for similar large-scale educational initiatives, which often run into hundreds of millions of dollars.
Small Business Impact
The data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. Given the nature of the award to a large university, it is unlikely that small businesses would be primary recipients unless through subcontracting. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities exist for small businesses within the scope of this educational services agreement.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would likely be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to performance metrics outlined in the contract. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance details may be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Education and Training Programs
- University Research and Development Contracts
- Naval Education and Training Command Services
- Federal Higher Education Partnerships
Risk Flags
- Long-term contract duration may increase risk of obsolescence or changing requirements.
- Fixed-price contract type could lead to reduced flexibility if needs evolve.
- Performance monitoring is critical to ensure quality and relevance of educational services.
Tags
education-services, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, arizona-state-university, full-and-open-competition, fixed-price, higher-education, maryland, large-contract, professional-schools, training-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $6.2 million to ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY. START UP/ENROLLMENT PERIOD
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $6.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2022-06-02. End: 2026-07-31.
What is the track record of Arizona State University in performing similar large-scale federal contracts, particularly for the Department of Defense?
Arizona State University (ASU) has a significant history of engaging with federal agencies, including the Department of Defense (DoD), on various research, development, and educational initiatives. While specific contract details and performance ratings are often proprietary, ASU is recognized for its strengths in areas like aerospace, cybersecurity, and sustainability, which align with potential DoD needs. Its large scale and research capabilities position it as a capable contractor for complex federal requirements. A thorough review of ASU's past performance on similar contracts, including any past performance evaluations or award-fee determinations, would provide a clearer picture of its reliability and effectiveness in meeting government objectives. This would involve examining contract close-out data and any publicly available performance reports.
How does the per-student or per-service cost of this contract compare to other educational service contracts awarded by the Department of the Navy?
Directly comparing the per-unit cost of this $615 million contract is challenging without specific details on the number of students served, the types of courses or training provided, and the duration of each educational module. The contract is for 'Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools' (NAICS 611310), suggesting a broad scope that could include degree programs, specialized certifications, or research support. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify comparable contracts from the Department of the Navy that fund similar educational services, then normalize the costs by factors such as student enrollment, credit hours, or specific training outcomes. The fixed-price nature of this contract, however, implies that the government has negotiated a set price for the defined scope, which aids in cost predictability, but not necessarily in granular value-for-money comparisons without detailed service delivery metrics.
What are the primary risks associated with a long-duration (over 4 years) fixed-price contract for educational services?
Long-duration fixed-price contracts for educational services present several risks. Firstly, there's the risk of 'scope creep' if the educational requirements evolve significantly over the contract period, potentially leading to disputes over additional costs or services not initially envisioned. Secondly, the fixed-price nature can incentivize the contractor to minimize costs, which might, in some cases, lead to a reduction in the quality or comprehensiveness of the educational offerings if not carefully monitored. For the government, the risk is paying a fixed price for services that may become outdated or less relevant due to rapid advancements in technology or military doctrine. Conversely, if the contractor accurately forecasts costs and delivers high-quality services efficiently, the fixed price benefits the government by providing cost certainty. Effective oversight and clear performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks.
Given the full and open competition with 31 bidders, what does this indicate about the market's capacity to meet the Navy's educational needs?
The fact that this contract received 31 bids under full and open competition strongly suggests a robust and competitive market for the educational services required by the Department of the Navy. This high level of interest indicates that multiple institutions possess the capability and capacity to deliver the specified services. For taxpayers, this competitive environment is highly favorable, as it typically drives down prices through vigorous bidding and encourages contractors to offer their best value propositions. It also provides the government with a wide range of options and reduces reliance on a single provider, thereby enhancing program resilience and potentially fostering innovation as contractors vie for the award.
How does the $615 million award compare to historical spending patterns for educational services within the Department of the Navy or Department of Defense?
The $615 million value of this contract is substantial and represents a significant investment in educational services. To contextualize this, one would need to analyze historical spending data for similar categories within the Department of the Navy and the broader Department of Defense. This would involve looking at annual budgets allocated to higher education partnerships, professional development programs, and specialized training initiatives. Comparing this award to the average or median contract values for similar services over the past 5-10 years would reveal whether this represents a typical, above-average, or below-average expenditure. Such analysis would also help identify trends in how the DoD procures educational support and the typical scale of these investments.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Educational Services › Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools › Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Product/Service Code: EDUCATION AND TRAINING › EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Solicitation ID: N0018920RZ071
Offers Received: 31
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 660 S MILL AVE STE 312, TEMPE, AZ, 85281
Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Government, Higher Education, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Public), U.S. Regional/State Government
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $7,032,180
Exercised Options: $7,032,180
Current Obligation: $6,150,555
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N0018920DZ802
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2022-06-02
Current End Date: 2026-07-31
Potential End Date: 2026-07-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-01-12
More Contracts from Arizona State University
- THE Robotic Lunar Explorationlunar Precursor Robotic Program (rleplprp) Consists of a Series of Robotic Lunar Exploration Missions to Prepare for and to Support Future Human Exploration Activities. the Primary Purpose of the Robotic Preparation IS to Reduce Risk, Enhance Mission Success, and Reduce the Cost of Future Human Missions. the LRO Payload Used to Accomplish the Mission Objectives Consists of the Following SIX Instruments: 1. Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter (lola) Measurement Investigation Shall Determine the Global Topography of the Lunar Surface AT High Resolution, Measure Landing Site Slopes and Search for Polar Ices in Shadowed Regions; 2. Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (lroc) Shall Acquire Targeted Images of the Lunar Surface Capable of Resolving Small-Scale Features That Could BE Landing Site Hazards, AS Well AS Wide-Angle Images AT Multiple Wavelengths of the Lunar Poles to Document Changing Illumination Conditions and Potential Resources; 3. Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector (lend) Shall MAP the Flux of Neutrons From the Lunar Surface to Search for Evidence of Water ICE and Provide Measurements of the Space Radiation Environment Which CAN BE Useful for Future Human Exploration; 4. Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment (dlre) Shall MAP the Temperature of the Entire Lunar Surface AT 300 Meter Horizontal Scales to Identify Cold-Traps and Potential ICE Deposits; 5. Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project (lamp) Shall Observe the Entire Lunar Surface in the FAR Ultraviolet to Search for Surface Ices and Frosts in the Polar Regions and to Provide Images of Permanently Shadowed Regions Illuminated Only by Starlight; 6. Cosmic RAY Telescope for the Effects of Radiation (crater) Shall Investigate the Effect of Galactic Cosmic Rays on Tissue-Equivalent Plastics AS a Constraint on Models of Biological Response to Background Space Radiation. Each Instrument Will BE Managed by a Principal Investigator (PI), WHO Will BE Responsible for Delivering the Flight Instrument to the LRO Project, AS Well AS Producing the Instrument's Data Products and Delivering Them to the Planetary Data System (PDS) in Accordance With Their Data Product Specification Document — $92.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- ,Ct::igf Psyche: Journey to a Metal World This Contract Provides for Work to BE Performed by the Principal Investigator in Support of the Phase a Concept Definition Portion of the Nasa Discovery Program 2014 Announcement of Opportunity (AO) (nnh14zda014o) Solicitation Dated November 5, 2014. the Mission Principal Investigator (PI), DR. Linda Elkins-Tanton, of the School of Earth and Space Exploration AT Arizona State University (ASU), IS Responsible for the Success and Scientific Integrity of the Mission. AS Such, the PI Shall Lead the Project, Manage Project Resources, and Direct ALL Activities of the Science Team Carried OUT in Support of the Mission. Specifically, During Phase a, the PI Will Lead the Mission Team in Conducting the Concept Study Report and Associated Site Visit. Should the Mission BE Selected to Continue Into Phase B, the PI Will Lead the Team Through the Initiation of the Phase B Effort With a Transition Phase Between Notification of Award and Establishment of the Phase B Contract. the PI IS Assisted by a Deputy PI, DR. James Bell AT Arizona State University. JET Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) IS the Mission Major Partner for Spacecraft Development and Mission Implementation, and Shall Support the PI With a Project Team Experienced in Management, Systems Engineering, Mission Design, Payload Development, Safety and Mission Assurance, Navigation, and Mission Operations. Specific Objectives to Address the Phase a Criteria and Guidelines ARE: - Project Management for the Phase a Contract - Conduct and Support of Phase a Project Reviews - Phase B/C/D/E Spacecraft Development and Mission Planning - Phase B/C/D/E Cost Estimates - Concept Study Report Preparation - Orals/Site Visit Support by KEY Personnel This Contract Provides for Work to BE Performed by the Principal Investigator in Support of the Phase a Concept Definition Portion of the Nasa Discovery Program 2014 Announcement of Opportunity (AO) (nnh14zda014o) Solicitation Dated November 5, 2014. the Mission Principal Investigator (PI), DR. Linda Elkins-Tanton, of the School of Earth and Space Exploration AT Arizona State University (ASU), IS Responsible for the Success and Scientific Integrity of the Mission. AS Such, the PI Shall Lead the Project, Manage Project Resources, and Direct ALL Activities of the Science Team Carried OUT in Support of the Mission. Specifically, During Phase a, the PI Will Lead the Mission Team in Conducting the Concept Study Report and Associated Site Visit. Should the Mission BE Selected to Continue Into Phase B, the PI Will Lead the Team Through the Initiation of the Phase B Effort With a Transition Phase Between Notification of Award and Establishment of the Phase B Contract. the PI IS Assisted by a Deputy PI, DR. James Bell AT Arizona State University. JET Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) IS the Mission Major Partner for Spacecraft Development and Mission Implementation, and Shall Support the PI With a Project Team Experienced in Management, Systems Engineering, Mission Design, Payload Development, Safety and Mission Assurance, Navigation, and Mission Operations. Specific Objectives to Address the Phase a Criteria and Guidelines ARE: - Project Management for the Phase a Contract - Conduct and Support of Phase a Project Reviews - Phase B/C/D/E Spacecraft Development and Mission Planning - Phase B/C/D/E Cost Estimates - Concept Study Report Preparation - Orals/Site Visit Support by KEY Personnel — $45.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- TAS::75 0140::TAS — $25.3M (Department of Health and Human Services)
- Nasa IS Soliciting Proposals for Scientific Instruments That Might Reveal Answers About Lunar Resources That Could Support the Agency's Journey to Mars. Nasa Would Sponsor the Instruments to FLY on a Lunar Orbiter Designed by the Korea Aerospace Research Institute (kari). the Spacecraft, the Korea Pathfinder Lunar Orbiter (kplo), IS Scheduled to Launch in December 2018, and IS Part of Kari's Korea Lunar Exploration Program, Which Aims to Robotically Explore the Moon Through a Series of Orbiter and Lander Missions, Starting With the Kplo. Kari, Headquartered in Daejeon, South Korea, Provided Nasa With About 33 Pounds (15 Kilograms) of Payload Mass Aboard the Kplo, Which IS Scheduled to Launch Into Lunar Orbit in December 2018. in September 2016, Nasa Issued a Solicitation Seeking Science Instruments That Could Increase OUR Understanding of the Distribution of Volatiles, Such AS Water, Including the Movement of Such Resources Toward Permanently Shadowed Regions and HOW They Become Trapped There. Shadowcam Will MAP the Reflectance Within the Permanently Shadowed Regions to Search for Evidence of Frost or ICE Deposits. the Instrument's Optical Camera IS Based on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Narrow Angle Camera, BUT IS 800 Times More Sensitive, Allowing IT to Obtain High-Resolution, High Signal-To-Noise Imaging of the Moon's Permanently Shadowed Regions. Shadowcam Will Observe the Psrs Monthly to Detect Seasonal Changes and Measure the Terrain Inside the Craters, Including the Distribution of Boulders. Nasa's Advanced Exploration Systems Division (AES) LED the Payload Solicitation and Selection for the Nasa Instrument on Kplo. a Division of the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, AES Uses Innovative Approaches and Public-Private Partnerships to Rapidly Develop Prototype Systems, Advance KEY Capabilities, and Validate Operational Concepts for Future Human Missions Beyond Earth Orbit. Through This Partnership Opportunity With Kari, AES IS Addressing KEY Lunar Skgs While Complementing Kari's Primary Mission Objectives and Instruments — $21.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Military Studies Curriculum - Base Year — $2.8M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)