NASA awards $46M engineering contract to ASRC Research and Technology Solutions LLC for services
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $45,992,769 ($46.0M)
Contractor: Asrc Research and Technology Solutions LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2008-08-19
End Date: 2013-08-18
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $25.2K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: ENGINEERING, DESIGN AND FABRICATION SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: MOFFETT FIELD, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94035
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $46.0 million to ASRC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LLC for work described as: ENGINEERING, DESIGN AND FABRICATION SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting potential cost savings from competition. 2. The contract duration of 5 years suggests a long-term need for these services. 3. The cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing structure may incentivize cost overruns. 4. The specific engineering services provided are not detailed, making direct performance assessment difficult. 5. The contract's value is moderate within the context of large federal engineering procurements.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $45.99 million over five years averages to approximately $9.2 million annually. Without specific details on the services rendered or comparable contracts, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the sole-source nature of the award raises concerns about whether the government secured the most competitive pricing. Benchmarking against similar engineering services contracts would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation of cost-effectiveness.
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 among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the necessary capabilities or when circumstances prevent a competitive process. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery mechanisms inherent in a bidding process, potentially leading to higher costs.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. The government did not leverage market forces to drive down the price for these essential engineering services.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA, which receives essential engineering, design, and fabrication services. The contract supports specialized technical expertise required for NASA's missions. The geographic impact is centered in California, where the contractor is located. The contract likely supports a workforce of engineers and technical specialists.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pricing.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure can incentivize higher costs.
- Lack of detailed service description hinders performance evaluation.
Positive Signals
- Contract supports critical NASA engineering needs.
- Long-term contract indicates sustained requirement and potential for stable service delivery.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the federal procurement landscape, particularly for agencies like NASA engaged in complex research and development. The market for specialized engineering services is competitive, but specific niche capabilities can lead to sole-source awards. Federal spending on engineering services is substantial, supporting a wide range of government projects from infrastructure to advanced technology.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a large business, it does not directly contribute to the small business contracting goals. The impact on the small business ecosystem is neutral, as it does not create new opportunities or divert existing ones.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with NASA's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be defined in the contract terms and conditions, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the lack of publicly available detailed performance data.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Federal Engineering Services Procurement
- Aerospace Engineering Support
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing
Tags
engineering-services, nasa, california, definitive-contract, large-business, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee, research-and-development, federal-contract, technology
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $46.0 million to ASRC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LLC. ENGINEERING, DESIGN AND FABRICATION SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is ASRC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS 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 $46.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-08-19. End: 2013-08-18.
What specific engineering, design, and fabrication services were provided under this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract was for 'ENGINEERING, DESIGN AND FABRICATION SERVICES' under NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services). However, the specific nature, scope, and technical details of these services are not elaborated upon in the available information. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to assess the complexity, criticality, or uniqueness of the work performed. For a comprehensive understanding, one would need to consult the contract's statement of work (SOW) or other detailed documentation, which is typically not publicly accessible in full.
How does the $45.99 million contract value compare to similar NASA engineering contracts?
Comparing this $45.99 million contract value to similar NASA engineering contracts requires access to a broader dataset of NASA procurements within the Engineering Services category (NAICS 541330) over the contract's period of performance (2008-2013). Without such comparative data, it's challenging to definitively state whether this award represents a high, low, or average value. However, given NASA's mission scope, contracts in the tens of millions are common for specialized engineering support. The sole-source nature, however, suggests that price comparison might be less relevant than assessing the necessity and justification for a non-competitive award.
What are the risks associated with a sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for engineering services?
Sole-source contracts carry the inherent risk of reduced price competition, potentially leading to higher costs for the government compared to a fully competed award. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) pricing structure presents another risk: while the contractor is incentivized to control costs to achieve their fixed fee, the government bears the risk of cost overruns if the initial cost estimates are inaccurate. This structure can sometimes lead to less stringent cost management by the contractor if the fee is substantial or if the government's oversight is insufficient. For engineering services, where scope can evolve, CPFF can be appropriate but requires robust oversight to manage costs effectively.
What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The provided data simply states 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' as the contract type, which is a common indicator for sole-source awards. The specific justification for why this contract was not competed is not detailed. Typically, sole-source justifications are based on factors such as the urgency of the requirement, the unique capabilities of a single source, the need for compatibility with existing systems, or when only one responsible source exists. NASA would have had to document and approve such a justification, often requiring approval from higher authorities, especially for contracts of this magnitude.
What is the track record of ASRC Research and Technology Solutions LLC with NASA or similar agencies?
Information on ASRC Research and Technology Solutions LLC's specific track record with NASA or similar agencies is not provided in the data snippet. To assess their performance history, one would need to examine past contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any documented issues or successes with government contracts. A thorough review would involve searching federal procurement databases and performance review systems to understand their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedules and budgets on previous engagements.
How does the duration of 1825 days (5 years) impact the assessment of this contract?
A contract duration of 1825 days, equivalent to five years, suggests a long-term, stable requirement for the engineering, design, and fabrication services provided by ASRC Research and Technology Solutions LLC. This extended period implies that the services are critical and ongoing for NASA's operations or specific projects. From an assessment perspective, a longer duration allows for deeper integration of the contractor's capabilities with agency needs, potentially leading to efficiencies. However, it also means that the government is committed to this specific vendor for an extended period, reinforcing the importance of the initial justification for the sole-source award and the need for ongoing performance monitoring.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › OTHER RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (UEI: 076637073)
Address: 6303 IVY LANE STE 130, GREENBELT, MD, 20770
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Emerging Small Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $50,450,847
Exercised Options: $50,450,847
Current Obligation: $45,992,769
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-08-19
Current End Date: 2013-08-18
Potential End Date: 2013-08-18 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2018-07-15
More Contracts from Asrc Research and Technology Solutions LLC
- THE Ames Research Center (ARC) Consolidated Information Technology (IT) Services (acits) 3 Contract Provides Services in the Categories IT Systems&governance Support, IT Security Support, Network and Communication Systems&support, Application Management&support, Scientific Computing Systems&support, Innovation and Emerging Technologies, and Outreach/Informational Systems&support — $280.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Program Analysis and Control (paac III) Provides Planning and Scheduling; Configuration Management; Information Technology; Documentation/Library; General Business; and General Accounting Services — $277.6M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Unified Cyber Situational Awareness (ucsa) — $113.3M (Department of Defense)
- Information and Technical Services Contract — $67.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Spectrum Management, Engineering Services and Programmatic Resource Management Support. the Contractor Shall Provide Engineering Studies and Technical Support Related TO: (A) Domestic and International Spectrum Management and Regulatory Services, (B) Space Communication Engineering Services (C) Programmatic and Financial Control Tools and Services; and, (D) Space Communication Education and Public Outreach Services. Such Support Shall Include: (A) Engineering Studies and Technical Support Related to the Electromagnetic Spectrum and Telecommunications Systems AS Required for Near Earth and Deep Space Research; (B) U.S. Domestic and International Spectrum Regulatory Issues, (C) Space Communications Architecture and Technology Development; (D) Support for ALL Financial Activities and Project Scheduling; (E) and the Development of an Integrated Master Schedule; and, Support for WEB Applications, Including the Management of the 15 Space Communications and Navigation (scan) Program Websites; (F) Technical and Administrative Support for Outreach and Public Education Including Technical Secretariat Support for Conferences and Other Events; and, (G) Other Agency Programs Impacted by the Work Areas Described Herein — $34.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all Asrc Research and Technology Solutions 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 →