NASA awards $100M+ facilities maintenance contract to IAP World Services, Inc. over 12 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $100,250,492 ($100.3M)
Contractor: IAP World Services, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2004-07-30
End Date: 2016-09-01
Contract Duration: 4,416 days
Daily Burn Rate: $22.7K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: MOFFETT FIELD, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94035
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $100.3 million to IAP WORLD SERVICES, INC. for work described as: FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value exceeds $100 million, indicating a significant investment in facilities support. 2. Long contract duration of over 12 years suggests a need for sustained service delivery. 3. Awarded under full and open competition, implying a robust bidding process. 4. The contract type is a definitive contract, often used for complex or long-term requirements. 5. Services fall under Facilities Support Services, a critical operational category for government agencies. 6. The contractor, IAP World Services, Inc., has a substantial contract to manage.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's value of over $100 million for facilities maintenance over 12 years suggests a significant but potentially reasonable investment for a large agency like NASA. Without specific benchmarks for NASA's facilities portfolio or comparable contracts from other agencies, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the duration implies a stable, long-term relationship which can sometimes lead to cost efficiencies through economies of scale and contractor expertise. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the government.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a competitive environment, which typically benefits price discovery and can lead to more favorable terms for the government. The agency sought a broad range of potential providers, allowing for a selection based on the best overall value.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally leads to better pricing for taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment among potential contractors, driving down costs and improving service quality.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA by ensuring the operational readiness and maintenance of its facilities. Delivers essential facilities support services, including maintenance, repair, and potentially operations. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around NASA facilities, primarily in California based on the 'sn' field. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled trades and facility management professionals.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long-term contract duration could lead to contractor complacency if not actively managed.
- Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined and managed.
- Reliance on a single contractor for critical facilities services could pose a risk if performance degrades.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive selection process.
- Firm-fixed-price contract type helps to control costs and provides budget certainty.
- Long contract duration can foster specialized expertise and long-term efficiency.
Sector Analysis
Facilities maintenance and support services represent a significant segment of the government contracting market, essential for the operation of federal agencies. This contract falls within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services sector. Spending in this area is driven by the need to maintain aging infrastructure, ensure operational continuity, and comply with safety and environmental regulations. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale facilities management contracts awarded by agencies with extensive real estate portfolios.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large contract awarded through full and open competition, it is unlikely to have significant direct subcontracting opportunities specifically mandated for small businesses, although the prime contractor may engage small businesses as part of its overall supply chain. The focus is on large-scale service delivery rather than small business participation goals.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers, who are responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and approving payments. Accountability is established through performance metrics and reporting requirements outlined in the contract. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases and public reporting, though detailed operational oversight specifics are usually internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Buildings Fund
- Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
- Other Agency Facilities Support Services
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration
- Potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly
- Reliance on contractor performance over an extended period
Tags
facilities-maintenance, facilities-support-services, nasa, national-aeronautics-and-space-administration, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, california, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $100.3 million to IAP WORLD SERVICES, INC.. FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is IAP WORLD SERVICES, INC..
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 $100.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2004-07-30. End: 2016-09-01.
What is the historical spending pattern for facilities maintenance services at NASA?
Historical spending on facilities maintenance at NASA, like other large federal agencies, is substantial and fluctuates based on infrastructure needs, modernization projects, and budget allocations. While specific historical data for NASA's facilities maintenance spending is not provided in this dataset, agencies typically allocate significant portions of their operational budgets to ensure the upkeep and functionality of their research centers, administrative buildings, and specialized facilities. This often involves a mix of in-house capabilities and contracted services. Analyzing past contract awards for similar services, such as those for janitorial, groundskeeping, HVAC, and structural repairs, would reveal trends in spending levels, contractor choices, and the types of services prioritized over time. Such analysis is crucial for understanding the long-term investment in maintaining NASA's physical assets and for forecasting future budgetary requirements.
How does the awarded price compare to industry benchmarks for similar facilities maintenance contracts?
Benchmarking the awarded price of $100,250,492.25 for this NASA contract against industry standards requires detailed analysis of the specific services included, geographic location (California), and contract duration (over 12 years). Facilities maintenance encompasses a wide range of activities, from routine cleaning and landscaping to complex HVAC and structural repairs. Without a precise breakdown of the service mix and performance standards, direct comparison is difficult. However, large-scale, long-term facilities management contracts for government entities often involve economies of scale. Industry benchmarks, often derived from data compiled by organizations like the International Facility Management Association (IFMA) or through analysis of similar large-scale government contracts, would typically look at cost per square foot or cost per employee supported. Given the firm-fixed-price nature, NASA aimed to establish a predictable cost, but the true value depends on the quality and efficiency of services delivered over the contract's life.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) typically associated with this type of facilities maintenance contract?
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a facilities maintenance contract like this one awarded to IAP World Services, Inc. by NASA are crucial for ensuring service quality and accountability. Common KPIs include response times for service requests (e.g., emergency repairs, routine maintenance), completion rates for scheduled preventive maintenance, customer satisfaction scores from facility occupants, energy efficiency metrics (e.g., reduction in utility consumption), compliance with safety regulations, and budget adherence. For a firm-fixed-price contract, the focus is often on meeting defined service levels and performance standards. NASA would likely have established specific metrics within the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) to measure the contractor's success in maintaining facilities, ensuring operational continuity, and providing a safe and functional environment for personnel and research activities.
What is the track record of IAP World Services, Inc. in performing similar government contracts?
IAP World Services, Inc. has a significant history of performing government contracts, particularly in logistics, facilities management, and base operations support, often in challenging or remote environments. Their experience spans various agencies, including the Department of Defense and other federal entities. For facilities maintenance, their track record typically involves managing large-scale operations, ensuring infrastructure integrity, and providing essential support services. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts would involve reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any documented disputes or contract terminations, and the scale and complexity of services previously delivered. A strong track record suggests a higher likelihood of successful performance on this NASA contract, while any past issues would warrant closer scrutiny.
What are the potential risks associated with a long-term (12+ year) facilities maintenance contract?
Long-term contracts, such as this 12+ year agreement for facilities maintenance, present several potential risks. Firstly, there's the risk of contractor complacency; over an extended period, a contractor might reduce efforts if performance monitoring is lax, assuming their position is secure. Secondly, the fixed-price nature, while beneficial for budget certainty, can become a risk if unforeseen cost increases occur due to inflation, material price volatility, or changes in regulatory requirements that were not adequately anticipated. Thirdly, technological advancements in facilities management or maintenance could render current methods or equipment obsolete, potentially leading to inefficiencies if the contractor is slow to adapt. Finally, a long duration increases the risk of key personnel turnover within the contractor organization, potentially impacting institutional knowledge and service consistency. Robust oversight and clear mechanisms for contract modification or review are essential to mitigate these risks.
How does this contract fit into NASA's overall strategy for infrastructure management?
This contract is integral to NASA's strategy for maintaining and operating its extensive physical infrastructure, which is critical for its scientific research, space exploration missions, and administrative functions. By outsourcing facilities maintenance to a specialized contractor like IAP World Services, Inc. under a long-term agreement, NASA can achieve economies of scale, leverage contractor expertise, and ensure consistent service delivery across its facilities, particularly those located in California. This allows NASA to focus its internal resources on its core mission objectives rather than day-to-day facility upkeep. The firm-fixed-price structure provides budget predictability, aiding in long-term financial planning for infrastructure management. The contract's duration suggests a strategic commitment to a stable operational environment for its key assets.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: IAP Global Services, LLC (UEI: 079492183)
Address: 7315 N. ATLANTIC AVE, CAPE CANAVERAL, FL, 32920
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $109,903,793
Exercised Options: $109,903,793
Current Obligation: $100,250,492
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2004-07-30
Current End Date: 2016-09-01
Potential End Date: 2016-09-01 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2018-09-14
More Contracts from IAP World Services, Inc.
- 200107!000106!2100!KF04 !directorate of Contracting !dakf0400c0002 !a!n!*!n!p00001 !20001222!20010930!010816486!010816486!006092860!n!johnson Controls World Service!7315 N Atlantic AVE !cape Canaveral !fl!32920!25114!071!06!fort Irwin !SAN Bernardino !california!+000002389052!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !S1 !services !1000!NOT Discernable or Classified !561990!*!*!3! ! !c!*!*!*!b!*!*!n!z!a !N!R!2!004!B! !C!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! — $405.0M (Department of Defense)
- Contractor Logisitics Support E-6B — $240.0M (Department of Defense)
- Award of Satellite Communication (satcom) Support Services — $221.2M (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $194.9M (Department of Defense)
- Facilities Maintenance Services (FMS) — $101.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
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 →