NASA awards $40.1M contract for central process systems support to Mainthia Technologies Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $40,107,201 ($40.1M)

Contractor: Mainthia Technologies Inc

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2004-10-01

End Date: 2009-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ON-SITE SUPPORT SERVICES FOR OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING OF CENTRAL PROCESS SYSTEMS AND

Place of Performance

Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $40.1 million to MAINTHIA TECHNOLOGIES INC for work described as: ON-SITE SUPPORT SERVICES FOR OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING OF CENTRAL PROCESS SYSTEMS AND Key points: 1. Contract awarded for essential operational support, maintenance, and engineering of critical process systems. 2. The contract duration spans five years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 3. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF), which incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 5. The contractor, Mainthia Technologies Inc., has secured this significant award from NASA. 6. The services are categorized under Engineering Services (NAICS 541330).

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for costs to be reimbursed plus a fee that is adjusted based on performance. While this can incentivize efficiency, it also means the final cost can fluctuate. Without knowing the target costs and award criteria, it's difficult to definitively assess if the $40.1 million represents excellent value for money. However, the five-year duration suggests a sustained need and potentially a competitive pricing structure was established.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. This indicates that the agency initially considered excluding certain sources but ultimately opened the competition to all eligible bidders. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition. While not a large number of bidders, full and open competition generally promotes price discovery and allows the government to select the best value offer.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition, even after an initial exclusion consideration, is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the most competitive pricing and best technical solutions available in the market.

Public Impact

NASA's operations and engineering capabilities are supported, ensuring the continuity of critical functions. The contract directly benefits the contractor, Mainthia Technologies Inc., through revenue and project execution. The services are likely performed at NASA facilities, impacting the local workforce in Ohio. This contract ensures the reliable operation of central process systems essential for NASA's mission.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector is characterized by specialized expertise and often involves long-term engagements for complex projects. NASA's spending in this area is typical for agencies requiring extensive research, development, and operational support for their unique facilities and missions. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific type of engineering services and the scale of operations supported.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless Mainthia Technologies Inc. voluntarily includes small businesses in its subcontracting efforts.

Oversight & Accountability

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type necessitates robust oversight from NASA to monitor costs, evaluate performance against award criteria, and ensure the reasonableness of the fee. Accountability is tied to the achievement of performance objectives outlined in the contract. Transparency would be enhanced by public reporting on the award fee determinations and the justification for the awarded amounts. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

nasa, engineering-services, operations-maintenance, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, ohio, large-contract, professional-scientific-technical-services, federal-contract, us-government

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $40.1 million to MAINTHIA TECHNOLOGIES INC. ON-SITE SUPPORT SERVICES FOR OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING OF CENTRAL PROCESS SYSTEMS AND

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MAINTHIA TECHNOLOGIES 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 $40.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-10-01. End: 2009-09-30.

What specific central process systems are covered under this contract, and what is their criticality to NASA's operations?

The contract specifies 'ON-SITE SUPPORT SERVICES FOR OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING OF CENTRAL PROCESS SYSTEMS'. While the exact systems are not detailed in the provided data, 'central process systems' typically refer to the core infrastructure that supports an organization's primary functions. For NASA, this could encompass a wide range of critical systems, such as environmental control and life support systems in research facilities, power generation and distribution networks, specialized manufacturing or testing equipment, or data processing and communication infrastructure. The criticality is implied by the five-year duration and the substantial contract value, suggesting these systems are fundamental to ongoing research, development, or operational activities. Without more specific system identification, their precise impact on mission success remains generalized but assumed to be high.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure typically function, and what are the potential risks and benefits for NASA in this instance?

A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred and provides a base fee plus an additional award fee. The award fee is determined by the government based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. The primary benefit for NASA is the incentive for the contractor to exceed performance expectations, potentially leading to higher quality services or greater efficiencies. The risk lies in the potential for costs to escalate if performance targets are not clearly defined or if oversight is insufficient. NASA must establish objective performance metrics and diligently evaluate the contractor's achievements to ensure the award fee is justified. If not managed properly, CPAF can lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts, despite the performance incentives.

What does the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' designation imply about the procurement process?

This designation suggests a multi-stage procurement process. Initially, NASA may have intended to restrict the competition to a select group of sources, perhaps due to specific technical requirements or prior relationships. However, the agency ultimately decided to open the solicitation to all responsible prospective contractors. This could have been driven by regulatory requirements, a desire to ensure broader market access, or a realization that the initial exclusion was not necessary or justifiable. For taxpayers, this typically signifies a more thorough effort to solicit competitive bids, potentially leading to better pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions being considered, even if the final number of bidders was limited.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar engineering support services at NASA or other federal agencies?

Historical spending on engineering support services across federal agencies, particularly within NASA, is substantial and varies significantly based on mission scope and specific project needs. Agencies like NASA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Energy frequently procure engineering services for research, development, infrastructure maintenance, and complex system operations. Contracts can range from millions to billions of dollars over several years. Factors influencing spending include the complexity of the systems being supported, the level of technical expertise required, and the duration of the need. Without specific historical data for this particular type of 'central process systems' support at NASA, it's difficult to provide a precise benchmark, but the $40.1 million award over five years appears to be a significant, but not necessarily outlier, investment for specialized engineering support within a large federal agency.

What is Mainthia Technologies Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly with NASA?

Information regarding Mainthia Technologies Inc.'s specific track record with federal contracts, especially with NASA, is not detailed in the provided data snippet. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing the company's contract history, including past performance evaluations, any disputes or claims, and the types and values of previous awards. Federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) would typically contain this information. Without access to that detailed history, it's presumed that Mainthia Technologies Inc. met NASA's requirements for this specific solicitation, including technical capabilities, past performance, and financial stability, to be awarded this $40.1 million contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT)PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Solicitation ID: 04C6G001

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7055 ENGLE ROAD, SUITE 502, CLEVELAND, OH, 90

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $64,637,774

Exercised Options: $64,637,774

Current Obligation: $40,107,201

Timeline

Start Date: 2004-10-01

Current End Date: 2009-09-30

Potential End Date: 2009-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2013-10-14

More Contracts from Mainthia Technologies Inc

View all Mainthia Technologies Inc federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending