NASA's $27.5M Facilities Support Contract Awarded to CALL HENRY INC for 6 Years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $27,499,737 ($27.5M)
Contractor: Call Henry Inc
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2007-10-24
End Date: 2013-11-30
Contract Duration: 2,229 days
Daily Burn Rate: $12.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: OTHER (NONE OF THE ABOVE)
Sector: Other
Official Description: NEW TASK UNDER CALL HENRY
Place of Performance
Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $27.5 million to CALL HENRY INC for work described as: NEW TASK UNDER CALL HENRY Key points: 1. Value for money assessed through competitive bidding process. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open approach. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, given the contract's duration and scope. 4. Performance context relies on contractor's ability to manage facilities support. 5. Sector positioning within facilities support services for government agencies.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $27.5 million over approximately six years suggests a moderate annual spend. Without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the fact that it was awarded under full and open competition implies that multiple bidders vied for the contract, which typically drives more competitive pricing. Benchmarking against similar facilities support contracts would provide a clearer picture of whether the pricing is aligned with market rates for comparable services.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, meaning that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a robust competitive environment. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery, as it encourages bidders to offer their most competitive terms to win the award.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by ensuring that the government receives the best possible value through competitive pricing and a wide range of potential solutions.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA facilities by ensuring operational readiness and maintenance. Services delivered include a range of facilities support functions. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around NASA facilities where services are rendered. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for personnel in facilities management and support roles.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs without adequate oversight.
- Dependence on contractor performance for critical facility operations.
- Ensuring consistent service quality across the contract duration.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.
- Long-term contract provides stability for service delivery.
- Focus on essential facilities support services.
Sector Analysis
The facilities support services sector is a critical component of government operations, encompassing a wide range of activities from maintenance and repair to groundskeeping and custodial services. This contract fits within the broader category of professional, scientific, and technical services, specifically focusing on the operational needs of government installations. Comparable spending benchmarks in this sector can vary widely based on the size and complexity of the facilities being supported.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting requirements for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any small business participation was mandated or occurred organically.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically be managed by NASA contracting officers and technical representatives who monitor performance against contract requirements. Accountability measures are built into the contract terms, with potential for remedies if performance is unsatisfactory. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible.
Related Government Programs
- Facilities Maintenance and Repair Services
- Government Operations and Support Services
- NASA Procurement
Risk Flags
- Contract duration may increase risk of obsolescence or performance degradation.
- Potential for cost overruns if scope is not tightly managed.
Tags
nasa, facilities-support-services, call-henry-inc, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, government-contracting, ohio, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $27.5 million to CALL HENRY INC. NEW TASK UNDER CALL HENRY
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CALL HENRY 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 $27.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-10-24. End: 2013-11-30.
What is the historical spending pattern for facilities support services at NASA?
Historical spending on facilities support services at NASA, like at other large federal agencies, can fluctuate based on infrastructure needs, modernization projects, and budget allocations. While this specific contract represents $27.5 million over approximately six years, NASA's overall expenditure in this category would encompass numerous other contracts for various facilities across its numerous centers. Analyzing past budgets and contract awards for similar services would reveal trends in investment in maintaining and operating its critical research, development, and operational infrastructure. Factors such as the age of facilities, the scope of research conducted, and agency-wide efficiency initiatives all play a role in shaping these spending patterns over time.
How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar facilities support contracts awarded by other federal agencies?
Benchmarking the pricing of this $27.5 million contract against similar facilities support contracts awarded by other federal agencies requires access to detailed cost data and service level agreements for comparable contracts. Factors such as geographic location of facilities, the specific services included (e.g., HVAC maintenance, janitorial, security, groundskeeping), the size and complexity of the facilities, and the contract duration all influence pricing. Generally, contracts awarded under full and open competition tend to yield more competitive pricing. However, without specific comparable data points, it is difficult to definitively state whether this contract's pricing is above, below, or in line with market rates for similar federal facilities support services.
What are the primary risks associated with this facilities support contract for NASA?
The primary risks associated with this facilities support contract for NASA include potential performance deficiencies by the contractor, leading to disruptions in essential facility operations. There's also a risk of cost overruns if the scope of work expands beyond initial projections without adequate change control. Contractor personnel reliability and security could pose risks, especially in sensitive research environments. Furthermore, a lack of robust oversight could lead to substandard service delivery or missed opportunities for cost savings. The long-term nature of the contract also introduces a risk of vendor lock-in, potentially making it difficult to adapt to changing needs or technology without incurring significant transition costs.
What is the track record of CALL HENRY INC in performing similar federal contracts?
To assess the track record of CALL HENRY INC in performing similar federal contracts, a review of their past performance evaluations, contract history, and any reported disputes or terminations would be necessary. Information on their experience with facilities support services, particularly for large government agencies like NASA, would be crucial. Databases such as the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) and the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) are valuable resources for this type of analysis. A positive history of on-time delivery, quality service, and adherence to contract terms would indicate a lower performance risk, while a history of issues would raise concerns.
How does the duration of this contract (2229 days) impact its overall value and risk profile?
The duration of this contract, approximately 2229 days (over six years), offers several implications for its value and risk profile. From a value perspective, a longer duration can provide cost stability and predictability for NASA, potentially reducing administrative burden and allowing the contractor to achieve economies of scale. It also allows for a more stable workforce and deeper integration of services. However, a longer duration also increases the risk of technological obsolescence in service delivery methods, potential for contractor performance degradation over time, and the risk of being locked into a contract that may not align with future agency needs or budget realities. Robust performance management and clear exit clauses are crucial for mitigating these long-term risks.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: OTHER (NONE OF THE ABOVE) (3)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 308 PINE ST., TITUSVILLE, FL, 08
Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $27,499,737
Exercised Options: $27,499,737
Current Obligation: $27,499,737
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNC07BA04B
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-10-24
Current End Date: 2013-11-30
Potential End Date: 2013-11-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2014-03-29
More Contracts from Call Henry Inc
- Federal Contract — $72.8M (Department of Defense)
- This Contract FA4610-18-C-0005 Replaces FA4610-12-C-0004 — $72.6M (Department of Defense)
- "NEW Award" Launch Operations Support Contract (losc) - Range Support Services - FY12 Through FY17 — $54.7M (Department of Defense)
- Facilities Maintenance and Support Services — $32.0M (Environmental Protection Agency)
- Funcing — $19.9M (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 →