NASA's $10.7M Facilities Support Services Contract Awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,683,990 ($10.7M)

Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2005-05-01

End Date: 2015-09-30

Contract Duration: 3,804 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: LOGISTICS

Place of Performance

Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $10.7 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: LOGISTICS Key points: 1. Contract provides essential facilities support services, crucial for NASA's operational continuity. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. A long duration of 3804 days indicates a significant, long-term need for these services. 4. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) pricing structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 5. The contract's value is moderate within the context of large federal facilities support contracts. 6. No specific small business set-aside was noted, potentially limiting direct small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $10.7 million over its 10-year duration suggests a moderate annual spend for facilities support. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale federal facilities support contracts requires detailed analysis of scope and service levels. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure, while common for complex services, can lead to costs exceeding initial estimates if not managed rigorously. The pricing mechanism aims to reward high performance, but the ultimate value for money depends heavily on the achieved award fees and the efficiency of service delivery.

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,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on pre-qualification or other criteria. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation generally implies a robust competitive environment. This approach is intended to ensure the government receives the best value by considering a wide range of qualified offerors, fostering price discovery and innovation.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process like this generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs and improving service quality through market forces. It ensures that public funds are used efficiently by selecting the most capable and cost-effective provider.

Public Impact

Benefits NASA by ensuring the reliable operation and maintenance of its facilities. Services delivered include a broad range of facility support functions essential for research and operations. Geographic impact is primarily focused on NASA facilities within Ohio, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include the employment of personnel for facility maintenance, operations, and management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a significant segment of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector encompasses a wide array of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of government and commercial facilities. Federal spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need to maintain aging infrastructure and support complex operational requirements across various agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be assessed based on the square footage managed, types of services provided (e.g., maintenance, janitorial, security, utilities), and geographic location.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This means that while large businesses were eligible and awarded the contract, there is no explicit requirement for a portion of the work to be subcontracted to small businesses under this specific award. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC's internal subcontracting policies and their engagement with the small business supply chain for materials and specialized services not directly performed by their own workforce.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contracting officer and their representatives. Performance monitoring, invoicing review, and compliance checks are standard oversight mechanisms. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure necessitates detailed performance evaluations against defined criteria to justify award fees, adding a layer of accountability. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific operational details may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

facilities-support, nasa, kbr-wyle-services, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, delivery-order, ohio, logistics, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, long-term-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $10.7 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. LOGISTICS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, 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 $10.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-05-01. End: 2015-09-30.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services at NASA?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities support services at NASA requires access to detailed budget appropriations and contract award data over multiple fiscal years. Generally, federal agencies like NASA allocate significant portions of their budgets to maintaining and operating their extensive facilities, which include research centers, launch sites, and administrative buildings. Spending can fluctuate based on infrastructure upgrades, new construction projects, and shifts in operational requirements. Factors such as aging infrastructure necessitating more maintenance, or conversely, consolidation efforts reducing facility footprints, can influence these trends. Without specific historical data for NASA's facilities support, it's difficult to provide precise figures, but it is a consistent and substantial expenditure category for agencies with large physical assets.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) structure typically impact final contract costs compared to fixed-price contracts for similar services?

Cost Plus Award Fee (CPA) contracts allow the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a base fee and an award amount, determined by the government's evaluation of the contractor's performance against specific criteria. This structure is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or when innovation and high performance are critical. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPA contracts carry a higher risk of cost growth for the government, as the final cost is not predetermined. However, the award fee component is designed to incentivize superior performance, potentially leading to better outcomes than might be achieved under a less flexible fixed-price arrangement. The key to value realization in CPA contracts lies in robust performance metrics and objective evaluation processes by the government.

What are the typical performance metrics used in facilities support service contracts awarded by NASA?

Performance metrics for NASA facilities support contracts are typically tailored to the specific services required but often include key performance indicators (KPIs) related to operational efficiency, safety, responsiveness, and cost control. Common metrics might involve response times for maintenance requests, uptime percentages for critical building systems (e.g., HVAC, power), adherence to safety protocols and incident rates, energy consumption efficiency, preventative maintenance completion rates, and customer satisfaction surveys from facility users. For contracts with an award fee component, these metrics are crucial for determining the level of award fee earned by the contractor, directly linking performance to financial incentives.

What is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC's track record with NASA and other federal agencies for facilities support contracts?

KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, and its predecessor entities, have a substantial history of performing services for NASA and other federal agencies, including extensive work in logistics, engineering, and facilities management. Their track record often includes large-scale support contracts at various NASA centers and other government installations. Publicly available contract databases and agency performance reports can provide insights into their past performance ratings, any significant contract disputes, and their success in winning and executing similar complex service agreements. Generally, companies with long-standing government contracts demonstrate a capacity to meet federal requirements, though specific performance on any given contract can vary.

How does the geographic location of the contractor (Ohio) influence the delivery and cost of services for NASA facilities?

The geographic location of the contractor, KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, being based in Ohio, can influence service delivery and costs depending on the location of the NASA facilities they are contracted to support. If the primary NASA facilities are also located in Ohio, this proximity can lead to reduced travel time, potentially lower logistical costs, and faster response times for on-site services. However, if the NASA facilities are geographically dispersed or located far from the contractor's base, the costs associated with travel, accommodation, and managing a distributed workforce could increase. The contract's scope and specific service level agreements would dictate the extent of this influence.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesFacilities Support ServicesFacilities Support Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7701 GREENBELT RD STE 400, GREENBELT, MD, 20770

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,524,229

Exercised Options: $11,524,229

Current Obligation: $10,683,990

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NNC05CB17C

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-05-01

Current End Date: 2015-09-30

Potential End Date: 2015-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2017-02-08

More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC

View all KBR Wyle Services, LLC federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending