NASA's $44.4M SAR ASF DAAC contract awarded to University of Alaska, Fairbanks, for R&D in physical sciences
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $44,389,215 ($44.4M)
Contractor: University of Alaska Fairbanks
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2008-04-01
End Date: 2013-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,008 days
Daily Burn Rate: $22.1K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST NO FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR (SAR) DISTRIBUTED ACTIVE ARCHIVE CENTER (ASF DAAC) FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA, FAIRBANKS
Place of Performance
Location: FAIRBANKS, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR County, ALASKA, 99775
State: Alaska Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $44.4 million to UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS for work described as: SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR (SAR) DISTRIBUTED ACTIVE ARCHIVE CENTER (ASF DAAC) FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA, FAIRBANKS Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies and competitive pricing. 2. The contract focuses on research and development in physical sciences, specifically related to Synthetic Aperture Radar data. 3. Performance period spans over 5 years, indicating a long-term need for these specialized research services. 4. The awardee, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, has a specific focus that aligns with the contract's research objectives. 5. Lack of competition suggests potential risks related to innovation and market-driven cost reductions. 6. The contract type 'COST NO FEE' implies the government bears the cost of performance, with no fee awarded to the contractor.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its specialized nature and sole-source award. The 'COST NO FEE' contract type means the government covers all allowable costs incurred by the contractor, which can sometimes lead to less stringent cost control compared to fixed-price contracts. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to assess if the pricing reflects fair market value or if there were opportunities for cost savings through competition. Further analysis would require comparing the cost structure and deliverables to similar R&D contracts in the physical sciences, particularly those involving data archiving and distribution.
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. This typically occurs when a specific entity possesses unique capabilities or when circumstances prevent a competitive process. The lack of competition means there were no multiple bidders to compare proposals and pricing from, potentially limiting the government's ability to secure the most cost-effective solution. The justification for a sole-source award would need to be thoroughly reviewed to understand why competition was not feasible.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the benefit of competitive pressure on pricing is absent. It also limits opportunities for other qualified organizations to secure government funding and demonstrate their capabilities.
Public Impact
The University of Alaska, Fairbanks, benefits through continued funding and research opportunities in its specialized field. The contract supports the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) mission by ensuring the availability and management of critical Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data. Researchers and scientists globally will benefit from access to the archived SAR data, enabling further scientific discovery and application. The contract supports specialized scientific research and data management roles within the university, potentially impacting a small but highly skilled workforce.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
- Cost-plus contract type may incentivize less rigorous cost control by the contractor.
- Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification could mask underlying issues.
- Limited competition reduces opportunities for innovation and market-driven efficiencies.
- Specialized nature of the research may make it difficult to benchmark performance and cost effectively.
Positive Signals
- Award to a specialized academic institution ensures alignment with specific research needs.
- Long-term contract indicates a stable and critical need for the services provided.
- Focus on data archiving and distribution supports broader scientific community access.
- The contractor's expertise in SAR data is likely a strong positive signal for successful performance.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical sciences and engineering. The market for specialized scientific research and data management services is often niche, with a limited number of institutions possessing the required expertise. NASA's spending in this area supports its scientific exploration and Earth observation missions. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within other government agencies funding similar advanced scientific research and data infrastructure projects.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have significant subcontracting implications for small businesses given the awardee is a large academic institution. The focus is on specialized research capabilities rather than broad service delivery where small business participation is typically encouraged. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a 'COST NO FEE' contract, NASA would be responsible for monitoring the contractor's incurred costs to ensure they are allowable, reasonable, and allocable to the contract. Transparency would depend on NASA's reporting practices and the public availability of contract performance data. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Earth Science Division Programs
- National Science Foundation Research Grants
- NOAA Satellite Data Services
- USGS Data Management Contracts
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award raises concerns about competition and potential cost efficiencies.
- Cost-plus contract type may reduce contractor incentive for cost control.
- Lack of detailed performance metrics in summary data hinders thorough value assessment.
Tags
nasa, research-and-development, physical-sciences, data-archiving, synthetic-aperture-radar, sole-source, cost-no-fee, university-of-alaska-fairbanks, alaska, definitive-contract, non-profit-contractor
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $44.4 million to UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS. SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR (SAR) DISTRIBUTED ACTIVE ARCHIVE CENTER (ASF DAAC) FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA, FAIRBANKS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS.
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 $44.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-04-01. End: 2013-09-30.
What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The provided data does not include the specific justification for the sole-source award. Typically, sole-source contracts are awarded when only one responsible source is available or capable of providing the required services. This could be due to unique capabilities, specialized knowledge, or specific circumstances that preclude full and open competition. For this contract, it's likely that the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, possesses unique expertise or infrastructure related to the Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) that made it the only viable option for NASA at the time of award. A thorough review of NASA's contracting records would be necessary to ascertain the precise justification.
How does the 'COST NO FEE' contract type influence cost control and contractor performance?
A 'COST NO FEE' contract means the government agrees to pay the contractor for all allowable, allocable, and reasonable costs incurred in performing the contract, but the contractor receives no additional profit or fee. This contract type is often used when the scope of work is uncertain or when the contractor is a non-profit entity, like a university, where profit is not the primary motivator. While it ensures the contractor is reimbursed for necessary expenses, it can reduce the incentive for stringent cost control compared to fixed-price contracts. NASA's oversight is crucial to ensure costs remain reasonable and that the contractor is not overspending, as the financial risk of cost overruns lies entirely with the government.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how is performance measured?
The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, given the nature of the work (SAR data archiving and distribution), typical KPIs would likely include data availability and uptime, data accuracy and integrity, timeliness of data processing and access, user support responsiveness, and adherence to data management protocols. Performance measurement would involve NASA's contracting officer's representative (COR) monitoring these metrics, reviewing contractor reports, and potentially conducting site visits or audits to ensure the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, is meeting its contractual obligations.
What is the historical spending pattern for SAR ASF DAAC services before and after this contract?
The provided data only details this specific contract awarded from 2008 to 2013. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to examine prior contracts for the SAR ASF DAAC services, potentially awarded to the same or different entities, and subsequent contracts that followed this one. Analyzing these historical data points would reveal trends in contract values, durations, award types, and contractor choices, providing context on NASA's long-term investment in this capability and whether spending has increased or decreased over time.
What is the potential impact of this contract on scientific research and data accessibility?
This contract is crucial for ensuring the continued operation and accessibility of the Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC). SAR data is vital for a wide range of scientific research, including Earth observation, climate change monitoring, disaster management, and resource assessment. By funding the archiving and distribution of this data, the contract directly supports researchers worldwide, enabling them to access and analyze critical datasets. The University of Alaska, Fairbanks' role in managing this archive ensures the long-term preservation and usability of valuable scientific information, fostering further discovery and application.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: University of Alaska Systems (UEI: 048679567)
Address: 903 KUYUKUK DR, FAIRBANKS, AK, 99775
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $45,612,289
Exercised Options: $45,612,289
Current Obligation: $44,389,215
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-04-01
Current End Date: 2013-09-30
Potential End Date: 2013-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-09-19
More Contracts from University of Alaska Fairbanks
- Labor Support — $62.0M (Department of Defense)
- Provide Support for High Performance Computing (HPC) Capability AT the Artic Region Supercomputing Center (arsc) — $51.1M (General Services Administration)
- Under the Scope of This Contract, the Contractor Shall Manage and Operate the Synthetic Aperture Radar Daac. These Tasks Include Systems Engineering, Operations and Maintenance, Development, User Services, Product Generation, Data and Information Management, Data Acquisition, Data Processing, Archive and Distribution of Science Data and Products, Information Technology Security and Related Science Support and Research Activities — $48.6M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Acquire Services for the Continued Development and Operation of the Synthetic Aperture Radar Distributed Active Archive Center for Nasas Earth Observing System Data and Information System — $37.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- IMS Waveform Operations and Maintenance — $26.7M (Department of Defense)
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 →