NASA's $446M Lockheed Martin contract for Mission Support Operations shows no competition and a long duration
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $446,069,424 ($446.1M)
Contractor: Lockheed Martin Space Operations Company
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2003-09-29
End Date: 2008-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,828 days
Daily Burn Rate: $244.0K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS (MOSC)
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77058
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $446.1 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE OPERATIONS COMPANY for work described as: MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS (MOSC) Key points: 1. This contract represents a significant investment in mission support operations. 2. The sole-source nature raises questions about potential overspending and lack of innovation. 3. A long contract duration of 5 years may indicate a stable, ongoing need for these services. 4. The 'Research and Development' classification suggests a focus on advanced scientific endeavors. 5. The contractor, Lockheed Martin, is a major player in the aerospace and defense industry. 6. The contract's value places it among substantial federal procurements in its sector.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this $446 million contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and specific R&D focus. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to ascertain if the pricing reflects fair market value or if taxpayers received the best possible deal. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure, while allowing for flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed rigorously. Comparing it to similar sole-source R&D contracts would be necessary for a more precise value assessment, but such data is often proprietary or difficult to access.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning NASA did not conduct a competitive bidding process. This typically occurs when only one responsible source is available or in cases of urgent need. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery and innovation that typically arises from multiple bidders vying for a contract. This approach can sometimes lead to higher costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may not have received the most cost-effective solution, as there was no pressure on the contractor to offer the lowest possible price.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's space exploration and research initiatives, ensuring continued operational support. Services delivered likely include mission planning, data analysis, system maintenance, and potentially research and development activities. The geographic impact is primarily centered around NASA facilities, likely in Texas where the contract is registered, and potentially at launch sites or research centers nationwide. The contract supports a highly specialized workforce within Lockheed Martin, contributing to the aerospace and defense sector's employment.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price competition and potential for cost savings.
- Long contract duration (5 years) may reduce flexibility to adapt to changing technological needs or market conditions.
- Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) contracts can incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored.
- Lack of transparency inherent in sole-source procurements makes independent value assessment difficult.
Positive Signals
- Contract awarded to a highly experienced and reputable contractor (Lockheed Martin) with a proven track record in aerospace.
- The contract supports critical NASA missions, indicating a high level of trust in the contractor's capabilities.
- The long duration suggests a stable and predictable operational environment for the services provided.
- The R&D classification indicates investment in cutting-edge scientific and technological advancements.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The aerospace and defense industry, where Lockheed Martin is a dominant player, is characterized by long-term, high-value contracts often involving complex technological solutions. NASA's spending in this area is crucial for maintaining its leadership in space exploration and scientific discovery. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale R&D contracts awarded by government agencies for similar complex support operations.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses mandated in the provided data. 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. Further analysis of subcontracting plans would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure implies performance metrics and award criteria that are subject to review and approval. Transparency might be limited due to the sole-source nature, but NASA's internal audit functions and potentially the Government Accountability Office (GAO) could provide oversight. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Mission Operations
- Aerospace Research and Development Contracts
- Large Prime Contractor Support Services
- Cost-Plus Contracts
- Sole-Source Procurements
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Long contract duration
- Cost Plus Award Fee structure
- Lack of competition
Tags
nasa, lockheed-martin, mission-support, r&d, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, sole-source, large-contract, aerospace, texas, research-and-development, historical-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $446.1 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE OPERATIONS COMPANY. MISSION SUPPORT OPERATIONS (MOSC)
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE OPERATIONS 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 $446.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-09-29. End: 2008-09-30.
What is Lockheed Martin's track record with NASA on similar mission support contracts?
Lockheed Martin has a long and extensive history of supporting NASA's missions, including various aspects of space operations, research, and development. They have been a prime contractor on numerous complex projects, often involving large-scale systems engineering, satellite operations, and launch support. Their track record with NASA is generally characterized by significant contributions to major space programs. However, the specific performance metrics and cost-effectiveness of past sole-source or competitively awarded contracts would require detailed review. Given their established presence and capabilities, NASA likely views them as a reliable partner for critical, long-term support operations like the MOSC contract.
How does the $446 million value compare to similar NASA mission support contracts?
Direct comparison of the $446 million value is difficult without knowing the specific scope and duration of 'similar' contracts. However, for a 5-year contract focused on R&D and mission support operations, this value is substantial but not unprecedented for a sole-source award to a major aerospace contractor like Lockheed Martin. NASA often awards large, multi-year contracts for critical functions. If this contract were competed, the value might be lower due to competitive pressures. The 'Research and Development' classification suggests a potentially higher cost ceiling compared to standard operational support due to the inherent uncertainties and innovation required in R&D.
What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source, Cost Plus Award Fee contract of this magnitude?
The primary risks associated with this contract structure are twofold. Firstly, the sole-source nature eliminates competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or optimize costs. Taxpayers may not be receiving the best value. Secondly, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure, while offering flexibility, can incentivize cost growth if the award criteria are not tightly defined and rigorously monitored. There's a risk that costs could escalate beyond initial projections, and the 'award fee' component might be paid even if performance is merely adequate, rather than exceptional. Effective government oversight is crucial to mitigate these risks.
How effective is NASA's oversight on sole-source contracts to ensure value for taxpayer money?
NASA employs a multi-layered oversight approach for its contracts, including sole-source awards. This typically involves dedicated contracting officers, program managers, and technical representatives who monitor performance, costs, and compliance. For CPA contracts, specific metrics and evaluation criteria are established to guide the award fee determination, aiming to incentivize desired outcomes. However, the effectiveness of oversight on sole-source contracts can be inherently limited by the absence of a competitive baseline. While NASA strives for robust oversight, the lack of market comparison makes it challenging to definitively assess 'value for money' compared to a competed contract. Internal audits and potential GAO reviews serve as additional accountability mechanisms.
What is the historical spending trend for Mission Support Operations at NASA?
Analyzing historical spending trends for 'Mission Support Operations' specifically requires access to NASA's detailed budget and contract databases over multiple fiscal years. Without that granular data, it's difficult to provide a precise trend. However, NASA's overall budget and its allocation towards operations and R&D have generally remained significant, driven by ongoing space exploration programs, scientific research, and technological development. Spending on major contractor support, especially for complex R&D and mission-critical functions, tends to be substantial and relatively stable, though subject to shifts based on program priorities and budget appropriations.
What are the implications of the contract's start and end dates (2003-2008) in today's context?
The contract's period of performance (September 29, 2003, to September 30, 2008) indicates that this was a historical award. Analyzing it today provides insights into past procurement practices, contractor relationships, and the types of support NASA required during that era. The $446 million value over five years reflects the scale of NASA's operations at the time. While the specific services rendered are no longer current, understanding this contract helps in evaluating the evolution of NASA's contracting strategies, the long-term nature of its support needs, and the enduring role of major contractors like Lockheed Martin in supporting complex government missions. It serves as a data point for historical analysis rather than current operational assessment.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL 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
Address: TWO CORPORATE PLAZA, HOUSTON, TX, 77058
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $695,770,368
Exercised Options: $450,389,651
Current Obligation: $446,069,424
Actual Outlays: $1,373,742
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-09-29
Current End Date: 2008-09-30
Potential End Date: 2008-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-06-27
More Contracts from Lockheed Martin Space Operations Company
- Test and Technical Services AT SSC — $169.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all Lockheed Martin Space Operations Company 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 →