NASA's $47.3M IT support contract awarded to Wyle Information Systems, spanning 5 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $47,350,795 ($47.4M)
Contractor: Wyle Information Systems, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2003-06-01
End Date: 2008-06-01
Contract Duration: 1,827 days
Daily Burn Rate: $25.9K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: CETNER IT SUPPORT AND OPERATIONS
Place of Performance
Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $47.4 million to WYLE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, LLC for work described as: CETNER IT SUPPORT AND OPERATIONS Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a 5-year IT support and operations agreement. 2. Full and open competition after exclusion of sources suggests a deliberate procurement strategy. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) can incentivize performance but requires careful oversight. 4. Wyle Information Systems has a track record with government contracts. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541519 indicates a broad range of IT services. 6. The contract duration of 1827 days (approx. 5 years) is typical for complex IT services.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of approximately $47.3 million over five years for IT support and operations is within a reasonable range for a federal agency like NASA. Benchmarking against similar IT support contracts for agencies of NASA's size and scope would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for performance-based incentives, which can be effective if award criteria are well-defined and rigorously applied. Without specific performance metrics and award fee payouts, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging, but the overall value appears fair given the duration and scope.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on predefined criteria, possibly related to technical capabilities or prior performance. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing, but the specific nature of the exclusion could have limited the pool. The agency's rationale for excluding certain sources would be critical to understanding the full competitive landscape.
Taxpayer Impact: The competitive process, even with exclusions, aimed to secure the best value for taxpayers. The fact that multiple bidders participated suggests that the government received competitive offers, potentially leading to cost savings compared to a sole-source award.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA, receiving essential IT support and operational services to maintain its complex technological infrastructure. Services delivered include IT support and operations, crucial for NASA's research, development, and space exploration missions. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around NASA facilities where Wyle Information Systems personnel are deployed. Workforce implications include the creation or maintenance of IT-related jobs within Wyle Information Systems and potentially its subcontractors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Award Fee contracts require robust oversight to ensure award fees are justified and not simply awarded based on minimal effort.
- The 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants scrutiny to understand the justification for any excluded bidders and its impact on competition.
- The broad NAICS code (541519) could encompass a wide array of services, necessitating clear performance standards to avoid scope creep or underperformance.
Positive Signals
- Awarding under full and open competition, even with exclusions, indicates an effort to leverage market competition for best value.
- The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term need for these IT services, implying a strategic alignment with NASA's operational requirements.
- The existence of multiple bidders (3) demonstrates that the opportunity attracted interest from multiple qualified vendors.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) sector, specifically focusing on IT support and operations services. The market for such services is vast and highly competitive, with numerous companies offering specialized solutions to government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks for IT support contracts can vary significantly based on agency size, complexity of requirements, and geographic location. NASA, being a large and technologically advanced agency, likely requires a high level of expertise, which can influence contract value.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a small business set-aside. However, the prime contractor, Wyle Information Systems, may still engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill portions of the contract, depending on their own subcontracting plans and the specific requirements of the work.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, NASA contracting officers and technical monitors are responsible for evaluating Wyle Information Systems' performance against established criteria to determine award fees. Transparency is typically managed through contract reporting mechanisms and public contract databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA IT Services Contracts
- Federal IT Support Services
- Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
- Information Technology Operations
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns in CPAF contracts if not closely monitored.
- Risk of limited competition due to source exclusions.
- Ensuring clear performance metrics for award fee determination.
- Scope creep in broad IT service contracts.
Tags
it-support, it-operations, nasa, wyle-information-systems, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, purchase-order, information-technology, federal-contract, ohio, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $47.4 million to WYLE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, LLC. CETNER IT SUPPORT AND OPERATIONS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is WYLE INFORMATION SYSTEMS, LLC.
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 $47.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-06-01. End: 2008-06-01.
What is Wyle Information Systems' track record with federal IT contracts?
Wyle Information Systems, LLC has a history of performing federal IT contracts. While specific details of past performance on similar contracts are not provided in this data snippet, their engagement with NASA on this significant contract suggests a level of established capability and experience. Federal procurement databases often contain performance evaluations and past performance questionnaires for contractors. A deeper dive into these records would reveal their success rates, any past performance issues, and their experience with various contract types, including CPAF. Their ability to win and execute a contract of this magnitude indicates they have met the necessary qualifications and demonstrated competence in the IT support and operations domain.
How does the value of this contract compare to similar IT support contracts?
The contract value of approximately $47.3 million over five years for NASA's IT support and operations is a substantial investment. To benchmark its value, one would compare it to contracts awarded by similar large federal agencies (e.g., Department of Defense, Department of Energy) for comparable IT services. Factors such as the scope of services (help desk, network management, cybersecurity, system administration), the number of users supported, and the specific technologies involved significantly influence pricing. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure also adds complexity, as the final cost depends on performance. Without access to detailed service level agreements and performance metrics, a precise value-for-money comparison is difficult, but the amount appears consistent with the scale of IT needs for a major federal agency.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract?
The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, like the one awarded to Wyle Information Systems by NASA, revolve around cost control and performance definition. For the government, there's a risk that costs could escalate beyond initial projections if not managed tightly, and that award fees might be granted too liberally, diminishing the incentive for true cost efficiency. For the contractor, the risk lies in not meeting the performance objectives required to earn the award fee, thus reducing their overall profit. Effective risk mitigation requires clearly defined, measurable, and achievable performance standards, robust government oversight, and a transparent process for evaluating performance and determining award fees.
How effective is 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in achieving best value?
The effectiveness of 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in achieving best value is nuanced. On one hand, it aims to leverage the benefits of broad competition by soliciting offers from all responsible sources, potentially leading to competitive pricing and innovative solutions. On the other hand, the 'exclusion of sources' element introduces a layer of pre-qualification or limitation. If the exclusions are well-justified (e.g., based on essential unique capabilities, security requirements, or past performance issues), it can help ensure that only qualified bidders participate, streamlining the evaluation process and potentially leading to a better-suited award. However, if exclusions are arbitrary or overly restrictive, they can limit competition, potentially increasing costs and reducing the pool of innovative solutions available to the government.
What are the historical spending patterns for NASA's IT support and operations?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for NASA's IT support and operations would involve examining contract data over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, and the contractors utilized. For instance, one could identify if spending has increased or decreased, if there's been a shift towards specific types of IT services (e.g., cloud computing, cybersecurity), or if NASA has consistently relied on a few key vendors or frequently changed contractors. Understanding these patterns helps in assessing the consistency of NASA's IT strategy, identifying potential cost efficiencies or inefficiencies over time, and evaluating whether current spending aligns with historical norms or represents a significant deviation.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Other Computer Related Services
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: KBR, Inc. (UEI: 784072626)
Address: 1651 OLD MEADOW RD, MC LEAN, VA, 22102
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Small Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $47,358,438
Exercised Options: $47,358,438
Current Obligation: $47,350,795
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-06-01
Current End Date: 2008-06-01
Potential End Date: 2008-08-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-03-20
More Contracts from Wyle Information Systems, LLC
- Funding — $110.1M (Department of Energy)
- Federal Contract — $53.8M (Department of Energy)
- TCO Network and Telecomm Infrastructure-Comits Obligation Includes $100K for Travel on MOD 1 — $50.8M (Department of Commerce)
- CIO IT Support — $36.0M (Department of Transportation)
- Provide Information Technology Services and Maintenance Support Services — $33.3M (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 →