NASA's $32.3M Aircraft Simulation Program awarded to Lockheed Martin without competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $32,330,203 ($32.3M)
Contractor: Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2000-12-21
End Date: 2005-12-31
Contract Duration: 1,836 days
Daily Burn Rate: $17.6K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: AIRCRAFT SIMULATION PROGRAM
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77058, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $32.3 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN INTEGRATED SYSTEMS, LLC for work described as: AIRCRAFT SIMULATION PROGRAM Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a cost-plus award fee basis, which can incentivize contractor performance but also carries inherent cost risks. 2. The sole-source award suggests a lack of readily available alternatives or a specific need that only Lockheed Martin could fulfill. 3. The duration of the contract (over 5 years) indicates a significant, long-term investment in aircraft simulation capabilities. 4. The contract's performance period spans a critical era for aerospace development, potentially supporting major aircraft programs. 5. The lack of competition raises questions about whether the government secured the best possible price and technological solution. 6. The 'Engineering Services' NAICS code indicates a focus on technical expertise and development rather than simple procurement.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Without comparable contract data or detailed cost breakdowns, assessing the value for money is challenging. The cost-plus award fee structure means actual costs could exceed initial estimates, and the award fee component is subjective. Benchmarking against similar simulation programs, especially those competed, would be necessary to determine if the pricing was competitive. The absence of competition inherently limits the ability to benchmark against market rates.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or when urgency precludes a competitive process. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no direct price comparison or negotiation leverage derived from a competitive environment.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure to drive down costs. The government missed an opportunity to explore alternative solutions and potentially achieve better value through a competed procurement.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are likely NASA's aeronautical research and development programs, enhancing their ability to test and refine aircraft designs. The services delivered include advanced simulation capabilities, crucial for reducing the need for expensive and time-consuming physical prototypes. The geographic impact is centered around NASA facilities, likely in Texas where the contractor is located, but the benefits extend to the broader aerospace industry through improved research. Workforce implications include specialized engineering and technical roles at Lockheed Martin, supporting the development and maintenance of the simulation program.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers.
- Cost-plus award fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
- Lack of competition may mean less innovation was explored compared to a broader market solicitation.
Positive Signals
- Award to a major defense contractor like Lockheed Martin suggests access to significant technical expertise.
- Long contract duration indicates a sustained commitment to a critical capability.
- Focus on simulation technology aligns with industry trends towards digital engineering and reduced physical testing.
Sector Analysis
The aerospace industry relies heavily on advanced simulation for design, testing, and training. This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting R&D for aircraft. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without knowing the specific simulation technology, but large-scale simulation programs for major aircraft development can run into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars over their lifecycle. This contract represents a significant investment in maintaining and advancing simulation capabilities within NASA.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not competed and there is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a large prime contractor, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless Lockheed Martin voluntarily engages small businesses for specific components or services.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The cost-plus award fee structure necessitates close monitoring of costs and performance against defined award criteria. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and lack of public competition details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to potential fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate
- Advanced Air Vehicle Program
- Aerospace Engineering Services Contracts
- Aircraft Design and Prototyping
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Cost-plus contract type
Tags
nasa, lockheed-martin, aircraft-simulation, engineering-services, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, research-and-development, aerospace, texas, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $32.3 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN INTEGRATED SYSTEMS, LLC. AIRCRAFT SIMULATION PROGRAM
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LOCKHEED MARTIN INTEGRATED 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 $32.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2000-12-21. End: 2005-12-31.
What specific aircraft programs or research initiatives did this simulation program support?
The provided data does not specify the exact aircraft programs or research initiatives supported by this particular 'AIRCRAFT SIMULATION PROGRAM'. However, given the contract's duration (2000-2005) and the awarding agency (NASA), it likely supported advancements in aeronautical research, potentially including next-generation commercial airliners, military aircraft concepts, or experimental flight vehicles. NASA's aeronautical research often focuses on improving fuel efficiency, reducing noise, enhancing safety, and developing new flight control systems. Simulation programs are critical for modeling aerodynamic performance, structural integrity, and flight dynamics before physical testing, thus contributing to the overall design and validation process for these advanced concepts.
Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis to Lockheed Martin?
The data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' signifying a sole-source award. Common justifications for sole-source contracts include unique capabilities, proprietary technology, urgent and compelling needs where competition is impractical, or when only one responsible source can provide the required supply or service. Without further documentation, the specific reason for this sole-source award to Lockheed Martin for the aircraft simulation program remains unclear. It could be due to Lockheed Martin possessing specialized simulation software, hardware, or expertise essential for NASA's specific requirements that were not available from other sources at the time of the award.
How did the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) structure impact the final cost and performance?
A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred, plus a fee that has a fixed component and a variable component. The variable component (award fee) is earned based on the contractor's performance against predetermined criteria, assessed by the government. This structure aims to incentivize superior performance by offering higher fees for exceeding expectations. For this $32.3 million contract, the final cost would be the sum of incurred costs and the earned award fee. While CPAF can motivate contractors to achieve high performance, it also carries the risk of cost growth if initial cost estimates are low or if performance targets are challenging to meet, potentially leading to higher overall expenditures than a fixed-price contract. The government's ability to effectively define and assess award criteria is crucial for ensuring value.
What is the significance of the 'Engineering Services' NAICS code (541330) in relation to this contract?
The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330, 'Engineering Services,' indicates that the primary purpose of this contract was to procure professional engineering expertise and related services. This typically involves the application of scientific and engineering principles to design, develop, analyze, and test systems, products, or processes. For NASA's aircraft simulation program, this NAICS code suggests that Lockheed Martin was contracted for activities such as conceptual design, system integration, performance analysis, simulation model development, validation, and potentially technical support related to aircraft simulation technologies. It signifies a focus on intellectual capital and technical problem-solving rather than the mere purchase of goods.
How does this contract compare to other federal spending on aircraft simulation or related engineering services?
The $32.3 million contract value over approximately five years ($6.46 million annually on average) places it as a significant, but not exceptionally large, investment in specialized engineering services for aircraft simulation. Federal agencies, particularly the Department of Defense and NASA, routinely spend billions on engineering and research services annually. While specific benchmarks for aircraft simulation programs are hard to pinpoint without detailed technical scope, this contract's value is consistent with major R&D or system development efforts. Its sole-source nature, however, makes direct cost comparisons difficult. Competitively procured, large-scale simulation development contracts might yield different cost structures due to market forces.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SVCS. › TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)
Address: 2625 BAY AREA BLAVD, HOUSTON, TX, 77058
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $32,527,192
Exercised Options: $32,527,192
Current Obligation: $32,330,203
Timeline
Start Date: 2000-12-21
Current End Date: 2005-12-31
Potential End Date: 2005-12-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-08-10
More Contracts from Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC
- 200407!000098!5700!LA01 !11 Cons/Lgcw !FA701204C0003 !A!N! !N! ! !20031121!20130630!836196972!805258373!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Integrated SYS!6801 Rockledge Drive !bethesda !nj!20817!50000!001!11!washington !district of Columbia !D.C. !+000010350876!n!n!000530185344!d399!other Adp&telecommunication Services !S1 !services !000 !* !541690!A!B!3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!b!b!y!b! !a!n!l!2!007!b! !C!Y!F! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !b!z!a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $679.5M (Department of Defense)
- 200611!007847!2100!w15p7t!usa Communications-Electronics !daab0703db009 !A!N! !Y!0243 ! !20060831!20110129!068514251!805258373!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Integrated SYS!1800 Route 34 !wall !nj!07719!76460!025!34!wall (township OF) !monmouth !NEW Jersey!+000077463827!n!n!000000000000!r414!systems Engineering Services !A7 !electronics and Communication Equip !000 !NOT Discernable !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!y!2!014!b! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !c!z!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $448.3M (Department of Defense)
- ISS Cargo Mission Contract (CMC) — $406.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE Moses II Effort IS a Five-Year Sole-Source Follow-On Contract to Maintain the Health and Safety of the HST Observatory Through the Next Phase of ITS Science Mission. the Scope of This Follow-On Effort Includes Conducting ALL Elements of HST Operations Other Than Science Operations, and to Perform Systems Engineering Tasks Required to Properly Maintain HST Flight and Ground Systems.mission Operations Responsibilities Include Safe and Efficient Control and Utilization of the HST Observatory, Maintenance and Operation of Hst-Unique Facilities and Equipment, AS Well AS Creation, Maintenance, and Utilization of HST Operations Processes and Procedures. Critical Systems Engineering Responsibilities Consist of Optimizing Mission System Capabilities to Maximize HST Operations Effectiveness and Science Productivity. Essential Management Requirements Include Providing a Technical Staff Possessing In-Depth Knowledge of HST S Varied, Complex, and Unique Flight and Ground Systems, Ensuring Successful Accomplishment of the Diverse Tasks Necessary to Effectively Conduct HST Mission Operations and Systems Engineering AS Well AS to Manage and Report Contract Element Cost and Schedule Performance — $360.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Federal Contract — $304.3M (Department of Defense)
View all Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, LLC federal contracts →
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 →