Boeing's $184M ISS Payload Integration contract awarded by NASA shows a 10-year history of performance
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $184,030,717 ($184.0M)
Contractor: THE Boeing Company
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2002-10-01
End Date: 2005-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,095 days
Daily Burn Rate: $168.1K/day
Competition Type: FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: OVERALL PAYLOAD INTEGRATION FOR ISS PAYLOAD
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77058
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $184.0 million to THE BOEING COMPANY for work described as: OVERALL PAYLOAD INTEGRATION FOR ISS PAYLOAD Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a single, large aerospace firm with a strong track record. 2. Pricing structure is Cost Plus Award Fee, which can incentivize performance but requires robust oversight. 3. The contract has a long duration, suggesting a stable, ongoing need for these services. 4. No small business set-aside or subcontracting goals were identified, potentially limiting small business participation. 5. The contract falls under Engineering Services, a broad category with significant government spending. 6. Awarded as a follow-on to a competed action, indicating prior competition may have occurred.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's total value of $184 million over three years suggests a significant investment in payload integration for the International Space Station (ISS). Benchmarking this against similar complex integration services is challenging due to the unique nature of space missions. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure implies that pricing is tied to performance, which can be a reasonable approach for complex, R&D-intensive projects where outcomes are not fully predictable. Without detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult, but the long-term nature of the ISS program suggests a sustained need for these specialized services.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: unknown
The contract is described as a 'FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION,' which suggests that the initial award was competed. However, the details of the competition for this specific follow-on action are not provided. It is unclear if this follow-on was also competed, or if it was awarded sole-source based on the prior relationship and performance. The number of bidders and the specific procurement method for this award are not detailed in the provided data.
Taxpayer Impact: The level of competition directly impacts taxpayer value. If this follow-on was competed, it likely resulted in better pricing and innovation. If it was sole-sourced, taxpayers may have paid a premium, and opportunities for new entrants or more cost-effective solutions were missed.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's International Space Station program by ensuring seamless integration of scientific and operational payloads. Supports ongoing space exploration and research activities conducted aboard the ISS. The services are primarily delivered in Texas, contributing to the local aerospace and engineering workforce. Ensures the operational readiness and scientific output of the ISS through expert engineering services.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of transparency regarding the competition for this follow-on action raises concerns about potential price inflation.
- The CPAF structure, while performance-incentivizing, requires diligent oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and aligned with objectives.
- No explicit small business subcontracting requirements are indicated, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms in this high-value sector.
Positive Signals
- The contract is a follow-on to a competed action, suggesting a history of competitive pricing and selection.
- The long duration and consistent award to a single contractor may indicate high satisfaction with performance and reliability.
- Boeing's established presence and expertise in aerospace engineering are likely critical for the complex integration tasks required for ISS payloads.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting aerospace and defense. The market for space-related engineering services is highly specialized, dominated by a few large, experienced contractors. NASA's spending on ISS operations and development represents a significant portion of this niche market. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique nature of space hardware integration, but contracts of this magnitude are typical for major space programs.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and there is no indication of specific small business subcontracting goals (ss: false). This suggests that the prime contract was awarded to a large business, and opportunities for small businesses would likely be through subcontracts awarded by Boeing. Without explicit subcontracting plans or goals, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear, but it represents a missed opportunity for direct small business prime contracting.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officers and program management. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure necessitates robust performance monitoring and evaluation to determine award fees. Transparency regarding performance metrics and fee determination is crucial for accountability. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction isn't detailed, NASA's Office of Inspector General typically oversees major contracts to ensure efficiency and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate
- International Space Station (ISS) Program
- Aerospace Engineering Services
- Payload Development and Integration Contracts
- Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
- Lack of transparency on follow-on competition method.
- Limited visibility into small business subcontracting.
- Long contract duration may mask performance degradation.
Tags
engineering-services, nasa, international-space-station, cost-plus-award-fee, follow-on-contract, aerospace, payload-integration, large-business, texas, federal-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $184.0 million to THE BOEING COMPANY. OVERALL PAYLOAD INTEGRATION FOR ISS PAYLOAD
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is THE BOEING COMPANY.
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 $184.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2002-10-01. End: 2005-09-30.
What is Boeing's track record with NASA on similar large-scale integration contracts?
Boeing has a long and extensive history of working with NASA on complex aerospace projects, including significant contributions to the International Space Station (ISS) program. They have been a prime contractor for various aspects of the ISS, including crew and cargo transportation systems (like the CST-100 Starliner), and numerous payload integration efforts. Their track record includes both successes and challenges, such as the development delays and cost overruns experienced with the Starliner program. However, for payload integration, which often involves adapting existing or new scientific instruments and systems for the unique ISS environment, Boeing has consistently demonstrated capability. This specific contract, being a follow-on, implies a level of satisfaction with their past performance in this domain, although detailed performance metrics are not publicly available.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) pricing structure compare to other contract types for this type of service?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure is common for complex, research-intensive, or developmental contracts where the final costs and performance outcomes are not easily predictable at the outset. Unlike fixed-price contracts, CPAF allows the contractor to recover incurred costs plus a base fee, with the potential for an additional award fee based on achieving specific performance objectives. This contrasts with Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), where the fee is fixed, or Firm Fixed Price (FFP), where the price is set regardless of costs. For payload integration, where technical challenges and innovation are key, CPAF can incentivize contractors like Boeing to exceed minimum requirements and deliver high-quality results. However, it requires rigorous government oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and award fees are justified, making it potentially more expensive than FFP if not managed effectively.
What are the primary risks associated with this type of payload integration contract?
The primary risks associated with this payload integration contract include technical complexity, schedule delays, cost overruns, and potential performance issues. Integrating payloads onto the ISS involves intricate engineering challenges, ensuring compatibility with existing systems, and meeting stringent safety and operational requirements. Any unforeseen technical hurdles or design changes can lead to significant schedule slips and increased costs, particularly under a CPAF structure. Furthermore, the long duration of the contract increases the risk of contractor performance degradation over time or changes in program priorities. Ensuring consistent quality and adherence to NASA's evolving requirements throughout the contract lifecycle is a key risk management challenge.
What is the historical spending trend for ISS payload integration services?
Historical spending on ISS payload integration services has been substantial and relatively consistent, reflecting the ongoing nature of the space station's mission and the continuous need to upgrade and maintain its scientific and operational capabilities. NASA allocates significant portions of its budget to the ISS program, with a considerable amount dedicated to the development, testing, and integration of new payloads. While specific figures for 'payload integration' as a distinct category can fluctuate year-to-year based on the manifest of upcoming missions and the complexity of the payloads, the overall trend indicates sustained investment. Contracts like this one, awarded to major aerospace firms, represent a significant portion of that historical spending, underscoring the critical and long-term nature of these services for the program's success.
How does the 'follow-on to competed action' designation impact the assessment of this contract's value?
The designation 'follow-on to competed action' suggests that the initial contract for this service underwent a competitive bidding process. This implies that the original award was likely based on a thorough evaluation of multiple proposals, potentially leading to better pricing and terms for the government at that time. For a follow-on action, this designation could mean several things: it might have been competed again, or it could indicate a sole-source extension based on the success of the initial competition and the contractor's established performance. If it was competed again, it reinforces the likelihood of good value. If it was a sole-source follow-on, the value assessment depends heavily on whether the original competitive pricing remains advantageous and if performance has justified any potential price increases. Without knowing the specifics of the follow-on procurement method, it introduces some uncertainty regarding optimal value realization.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FOLLOW ON TO COMPETED ACTION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 2100 SPACE PARK DRIVE, HOUSTON, TX, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $198,946,258
Exercised Options: $198,946,258
Current Obligation: $184,030,717
Timeline
Start Date: 2002-10-01
Current End Date: 2005-09-30
Potential End Date: 2005-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2011-10-14
More Contracts from THE Boeing Company
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (Department of Defense)
- International Space Station — $22.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200112!000108!9700!ZD60 !ballistic Missile Defense ORG. !HQ000601C0001 !A!N!*!N! !20001222!20080930!848025649!848025649!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !3370 E Miraloma AVE !anaheim !ca!92806!37000!089!01!huntsville !madison !alabama !+000383571022!n!n!000000000000!ad93!rdte/Other Defense-Adv Tech DEV !S1 !services !1caa!ballistic Missile Defense SYS !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !U!R!2!001!B! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $18.8B (Department of Defense)
- USN P-8A FRP II Long Lead Material — $18.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200512!010860!2100!w56hzv!tacom - Warren !w56hzv05c0724 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050923!20141231!016544780!016544780!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !J S Mcdonnell Blvd !saint Louis !mo!63166!65000!510!29!st. Louis !ST. Louis (city) !missouri !+000219245691!n!n!000000000000!az15!rdte/Other Research&development-Eng/Manuf Devel !S1 !services !301 !FCS !541330!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !d!u!u!1!001!n!1a!z!y!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! TAS::21 2040::TAS — $12.7B (Department of Defense)
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 →