NASA's $123.9M Facilities Support Contract to Sierra Lobo Inc. Awarded Without Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $123,908,575 ($123.9M)
Contractor: Sierra Lobo Inc
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2005-03-22
End Date: 2015-05-31
Contract Duration: 3,722 days
Daily Burn Rate: $33.3K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: DELIVERY ORDER FOR LINE ITEM 001 TESTCON OF OUTLINE AGREEMENT NNC05CA95C
Place of Performance
Location: FREMONT, SANDUSKY County, OHIO, 43420, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $123.9 million to SIERRA LOBO INC for work described as: DELIVERY ORDER FOR LINE ITEM 001 TESTCON OF OUTLINE AGREEMENT NNC05CA95C Key points: 1. The contract represents a significant investment in facilities support services for NASA. 2. The sole-source award raises questions about potential missed opportunities for competitive pricing. 3. The long duration of the contract (over 10 years) suggests a need for ongoing, specialized support. 4. Performance context is limited without specific metrics on service delivery and quality. 5. The contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a critical but often overlooked area of government operations. 6. The absence of competition may indicate unique capabilities required or a lack of market availability.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and the lack of publicly available comparable contracts for similar comprehensive facilities support at NASA centers. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but without competition, it's difficult to ascertain if the pricing reflects true market value or if taxpayers received the best possible deal. The extended period of performance suggests a stable, long-term need, but the overall value-for-money proposition is obscured by the procurement method.
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 capable of meeting the agency's needs. The lack of competition limits the agency's ability to leverage market forces to drive down prices and potentially discover innovative solutions from a wider pool of contractors. It suggests that Sierra Lobo Inc. possessed unique qualifications or capabilities deemed essential for this specific requirement.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may not have benefited from the cost savings that typically arise from a competitive bidding process. This could translate to a higher overall expenditure for the services provided.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA facilities, ensuring operational readiness and maintenance. Services delivered include comprehensive facilities support, likely encompassing maintenance, repair, operations, and potentially specialized technical support. The geographic impact is concentrated in Ohio, where Sierra Lobo Inc. is located and likely where the NASA facilities supported are situated. Workforce implications include the direct employment of personnel by Sierra Lobo Inc. to fulfill the contract requirements.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price discovery and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
- Long contract duration without competition raises concerns about sustained value and potential for cost creep.
- Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
- Limited public information on performance metrics makes it difficult to assess effectiveness.
- Potential for contractor lock-in due to specialized nature of services and long-term relationship.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the agency.
- Long-term award suggests a stable and reliable provider for critical support services.
- The contract likely supports essential NASA operations, contributing to mission success.
- The existence of a long-term contract indicates a recognized need and established relationship.
Sector Analysis
The Facilities Support Services sector encompasses a broad range of services essential for the operation and maintenance of physical infrastructure. This includes everything from janitorial and groundskeeping to complex building systems management and specialized technical support. Government contracts in this sector are substantial, reflecting the vast real estate holdings of federal agencies. Benchmarking is difficult without specific service details, but contracts of this magnitude often involve extensive site management and technical expertise, indicating a significant player within the facilities management market.
Small Business Impact
Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not available for this sole-source award. Typically, sole-source contracts are less likely to include specific small business participation goals unless mandated by specific program requirements or justified by the unique nature of the work. The absence of this information suggests that small business engagement may not have been a primary consideration in the procurement strategy for this particular contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight mechanisms for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's internal contract management and administration. Given it's a sole-source award, the justification and terms would be subject to internal review and potentially oversight by the NASA Office of Inspector General if performance issues or allegations of impropriety arise. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature of the award, with details on oversight specific to this contract not readily available in the public domain.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Facilities Maintenance Contracts
- Government Facilities Support Services
- Aerospace Contractor Support
- Federal Operations and Maintenance Contracts
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award without clear justification.
- Potential for lack of price competition.
- Extended contract duration without competitive re-evaluation.
- Limited public performance data.
- Lack of small business subcontracting information.
Tags
facilities-support-services, nasa, national-aeronautics-and-space-administration, sole-source, firm-fixed-price, ohio, large-contract, aerospace, operations-and-maintenance, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $123.9 million to SIERRA LOBO INC. DELIVERY ORDER FOR LINE ITEM 001 TESTCON OF OUTLINE AGREEMENT NNC05CA95C
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SIERRA LOBO 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 $123.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-03-22. End: 2015-05-31.
What specific facilities support services are included under this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract is for 'Facilities Support Services' under NAICS code 561210. While the specific line items are not detailed, this category typically encompasses a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and grounds. This can include routine maintenance, repairs, custodial services, groundskeeping, utility management, security systems maintenance, and potentially specialized technical support for laboratory or testing facilities. Given the agency is NASA, the services might also extend to supporting unique research and development infrastructure, clean rooms, or specialized testing environments, requiring a high degree of technical expertise and adherence to stringent safety and operational protocols.
What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The justification for a sole-source award typically stems from situations where only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the agency's requirements. For this NASA contract, potential reasons could include highly specialized technical expertise possessed by Sierra Lobo Inc. that is not readily available in the market, unique proprietary technology or processes required for the facilities support, or a critical need for continuity of operations where switching contractors would be detrimental to NASA's mission. Without specific documentation from NASA detailing the sole-source justification, it remains speculative, but these are common rationales for such procurement decisions.
How does the $123.9 million contract value compare to similar facilities support contracts at NASA or other federal agencies?
Directly comparing the $123.9 million value is challenging without knowing the precise scope and duration of services. However, for a contract spanning over 10 years (from March 2005 to May 2015), this value suggests a substantial and comprehensive facilities support operation. Large federal agencies like NASA, the Department of Defense, and the General Services Administration often award multi-million dollar contracts for facilities management, especially for large, complex installations. The value is significant but not necessarily an outlier for long-term, all-encompassing support at a major government facility. The key differentiator here is the sole-source award, which complicates value-for-money assessments against potentially competitively bid contracts.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this magnitude and duration?
A sole-source contract of this magnitude and duration carries several potential risks. Firstly, the lack of competition can lead to inflated pricing, as the contractor faces less pressure to offer the most cost-effective solutions. Secondly, there's a risk of contractor complacency or reduced innovation over time, as the absence of competitive threat may lessen the incentive to improve services or efficiency. Thirdly, dependency on a single contractor can create vulnerabilities; if the contractor experiences financial difficulties, operational failures, or decides to exit the market, NASA could face significant disruption in essential services. Finally, the justification for sole-source awards can sometimes be questioned, raising concerns about fairness and adherence to procurement regulations.
What is Sierra Lobo Inc.'s track record with NASA and other federal agencies, particularly in facilities support?
Sierra Lobo Inc. has a history of contracting with NASA and other federal agencies. While specific details on their facilities support track record for this particular contract are limited in the public domain, the company has been involved in various aerospace and engineering support services. Their past performance with NASA would likely have been a key factor in the decision to award this sole-source contract, suggesting a level of trust and proven capability. A deeper dive into contract databases and agency performance reviews would be necessary to fully assess their broader track record and suitability for such an extensive facilities support role.
How has spending on facilities support services evolved at NASA over the period this contract was active?
Analyzing the evolution of NASA's spending on facilities support services during the active period of this contract (2005-2015) would require access to NASA's historical budget and contract spending data. Generally, federal spending on facilities support can fluctuate based on agency priorities, infrastructure needs, and budget allocations. Factors like aging infrastructure, new construction projects, or shifts in operational requirements can influence spending levels. Without specific NASA-wide data for this period, it's difficult to provide a precise trend. However, it's reasonable to assume that maintaining complex research and operational facilities requires consistent and significant investment, making facilities support a perennial budget item for NASA.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SVCS. › TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP
Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 426 CROGHAN STREET, FREMONT, OH, 43420
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $124,347,502
Exercised Options: $124,347,502
Current Obligation: $123,908,575
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNC05CA95C
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-03-22
Current End Date: 2015-05-31
Potential End Date: 2015-05-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-07-22
More Contracts from Sierra Lobo Inc
- Environmental Testing and Integration Services (etis) II This Statement of Work (SOW) Specifies the Requirements for on Site Contractor Supplied Environmental Test and Integration and Other Laboratory Operations Services to the Goddard Space Flight Center (gsfc). the Scope of These Services Includes the Following: Operation, Maintenance, and Upgrade of Environmental Test Equipment and Facilities Located in the Gsfc Building 7/10/15/29 Complex, Area 300 Magnetic Test Site and Other Technical Facilities Located AT Various Locations Within Gsfc Including the Manufacturing and Electroplating Equipment and Facilities Primarily Located in Gsfc Building 5/10/21 Shops Mechanical and Optical Integration of Spacecraft, Flight Experiment Components, Instruments, Sub-Assemblies and Systems Design, Fabricate, and Manufacture Custom Spacecraft, Flight Experiment Components, Instruments, Sub-Assemblies and Systems Design, Manufacture, and Operation of Ground Handling Equipment and Fixtures Design, Manufacture, and Operation of Optical Alignment and Calibration Systems Design, Manufacture and Installation of Space Flight Thermal Blankets Design, Manufacture and Installation of Space Flight and Ground Support System Cable Harnesses Design, Manufacture, and Installation of Technical Facilities Including Buildings, Building Elements, Utility Systems, and Technical Equipment and Systems Define, Analyze, and Resolve Electromagnetic Radiation Issues Relating to Facility and Satellite Ground Support Equipment Operation Within the Test Complex. Support Spectrum Signature Analysis to Insure Interference-Free and Safe Operation of ALL Facility-Located Near Electromagnetic Wave Sensing Devices. Test and Integration Engineering and Engineering Analysis Cleanroom Operation and Maintenance Contamination Control Services Using Qualified and Experienced Personnel Maintenance and Operation of Certain Physical Plant Systems Such AS Processed Water, Emergency Power, Ln2/Gn2 Storage Systems, Conditioned Cleanroom AIR Hvac and Humidity Systems Recertification (testing and Inspection) of Lifting Devices and Equipment (LDE), and (inspection) of Pressure Vessels and Pressurized Systems (PVS) AT Gsfc, Greenbelt, Wallops, and Other Offsite Locations. Maintenance of LDE AT Greenbelt Site Only, NOT AT Other Sites; Non-Destructive Examination Testing of LDE and PVS Facility and Operations Safety Data Acquisition and Analysis System Development and Management — $251.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Test Engineering Contract Mechanism — $58.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Building 65 Research and Development Structural Test Servcies — $43.2M (General Services Administration)
- R&D Space Flight and Associated Hardware AT Msfc (roll-Up Thru MOD 25) — $39.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 347 Work Order Under Engineering Direct Outline Agreement Nnc05ca95c — $30.1M (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 →