NASA awards $31M to ASRC Federal for spectrum management and engineering support
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $30,954,393 ($31.0M)
Contractor: Asrc Federal System Solutions LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2005-12-01
End Date: 2010-11-30
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $17.0K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20770
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $31.0 million to ASRC FEDERAL SYSTEM SOLUTIONS LLC for work described as: SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a cost-plus award fee basis, allowing for performance incentives. 2. Duration of 5 years suggests a need for sustained, specialized support. 3. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential cost savings. 4. The engineering services sector is critical for NASA's complex missions. 5. The award amount is moderate within the context of large federal contracts. 6. Focus on spectrum management indicates support for critical communication and data transmission.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's cost-plus award fee structure allows for flexibility but requires careful monitoring of costs and performance to ensure value. Without comparable contract data, it's difficult to definitively benchmark the pricing. However, the duration and nature of the services suggest a potentially reasonable investment for specialized engineering support. The total award of over $30 million over five years averages to approximately $6.2 million annually, which needs to be assessed against the scope and complexity of the tasks performed.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to competition from other potential vendors. This approach is typically used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary information, or when there are urgent needs that preclude a competitive process. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery and innovation that typically arises from multiple bids.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the most competitive pricing due to the absence of a bidding process. This could potentially lead to higher costs than if the contract had been competed.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA, which receives essential engineering and spectrum management support for its missions. Services delivered are critical for ensuring efficient and effective use of the radio frequency spectrum for NASA's operations. The contract's geographic impact is primarily centered in Maryland, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include the employment of specialized engineers and technical personnel by ASRC Federal.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing.
- Cost-plus award fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
- Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
Positive Signals
- ASRC Federal is a known entity in government contracting, suggesting a degree of familiarity and established processes.
- The long duration of the contract implies a stable, ongoing need for these specialized services.
- The award fee component incentivizes performance, potentially leading to higher quality outcomes.
Sector Analysis
The engineering services sector is a vital component of the federal contracting landscape, supporting a wide array of government functions, particularly in areas like aerospace, defense, and technology. NASA, as a leading space exploration agency, relies heavily on specialized engineering support for its complex missions. Spending in this sector can range from small, project-specific tasks to large, multi-year support contracts. This particular contract falls within the mid-range for specialized engineering services supporting critical infrastructure like spectrum management.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, nor is there information indicating significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The focus is on a large prime contractor providing specialized services. This means the direct economic impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific contract is likely minimal, unless ASRC Federal actively engages small businesses for subcontracting roles not detailed in the award information.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The cost-plus award fee structure necessitates diligent monitoring of expenditures and performance against defined award criteria. Transparency regarding the justification for the sole-source award and the performance metrics used for the award fee would be key indicators of effective oversight. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Communications Systems Support
- Aerospace Engineering Services
- Federal Spectrum Management Programs
- NASA Research and Development Support
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award justification
- Potential for cost overruns in CPAF contracts
- Lack of competitive pricing benchmarks
Tags
engineering-services, nasa, maryland, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, sole-source, spectrum-management, aerospace, it-support, federal-contracting
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $31.0 million to ASRC FEDERAL SYSTEM SOLUTIONS LLC. SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is ASRC FEDERAL SYSTEM SOLUTIONS 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 $31.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-12-01. End: 2010-11-30.
What is ASRC Federal's track record with NASA and similar contracts?
ASRC Federal System Solutions LLC has a history of contracting with NASA and other federal agencies, often providing IT, engineering, and mission support services. Their experience typically spans various technical domains critical to agency operations. While specific performance metrics for this particular contract are not publicly detailed, their established presence suggests a capacity to handle complex engineering tasks. A review of past performance evaluations and contract awards would provide a more granular understanding of their reliability and effectiveness in delivering similar services to NASA and other clients.
How does the $31 million award compare to similar spectrum management contracts?
Benchmarking this $31 million award requires comparing it against contracts for similar spectrum management and engineering support services across federal agencies. Given the 5-year duration (2005-2010), the average annual value is approximately $6.2 million. This figure needs to be contextualized by the specific scope of work, the level of technical expertise required, and the complexity of NASA's spectrum needs. Without access to a database of comparable sole-source or competed contracts for specialized spectrum engineering, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, for highly specialized engineering support, this annual figure is within a plausible range for significant federal contracts.
What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract?
The primary risk associated with this sole-source contract is the potential for inflated costs due to the lack of competitive bidding. Without competing offers, there is less market pressure to drive down prices. Another risk is the potential for complacency from the contractor, as there is no immediate threat of losing the business to a competitor. Furthermore, if the justification for the sole-source award was not robust, there's a risk that alternative, potentially more cost-effective solutions or contractors were overlooked. Effective oversight and performance management are crucial to mitigate these risks.
How effective is the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure in ensuring program effectiveness for NASA?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure is designed to incentivize contractor performance by allowing for a base cost reimbursement plus an award fee determined by the government based on performance against specific criteria. For NASA, this structure can be effective in ensuring program effectiveness if the award criteria are well-defined, measurable, and directly tied to mission objectives and technical requirements. It allows NASA to reward superior performance while reimbursing reasonable costs. However, the effectiveness hinges on rigorous government oversight to objectively assess performance and determine appropriate award fees, preventing subjective or overly generous awards.
What are the historical spending patterns for spectrum management and engineering support at NASA?
Historical spending patterns for spectrum management and engineering support at NASA would likely show a consistent need for these services, given the agency's reliance on complex communication systems for its missions. Spending can fluctuate based on the lifecycle of major programs, the introduction of new technologies, and the specific requirements for spectrum allocation and interference management. While this specific $31 million contract represents a significant investment over its five-year term, understanding broader trends would involve analyzing NASA's budget allocations for similar support services across different fiscal years and comparing spending across various centers or mission directorates.
What are the implications of the contract's duration (1825 days) for long-term support?
The contract's duration of 1825 days, equivalent to five years, indicates a strategic decision by NASA to secure long-term, stable support for critical spectrum management and engineering functions. This extended period suggests that the services are not project-specific but rather represent an ongoing operational requirement. Such a duration allows the contractor to develop deep expertise and institutional knowledge related to NASA's unique spectrum needs and systems. It also provides NASA with continuity of service, reducing the administrative burden and potential disruption associated with frequent re-competition or contract transitions.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Arctic Slope Regional Corporation
Address: 7000 MUIRKIRK MEADOWS DR, BELTSVILLE, MD, 20705
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $41,261,611
Exercised Options: $32,906,382
Current Obligation: $30,954,393
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-12-01
Current End Date: 2010-11-30
Potential End Date: 2010-11-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-03-23
More Contracts from Asrc Federal System Solutions LLC
- Aerospace Systems Technical Reasearch and Operations Support Services (astros) — $216.1M (Department of Defense)
- ,Ct::igf Engineering Services Mets II Bridge Contract.the Purpose of the Multidisciplinary Engineering and Technical Services II Bridge (mets II Bridge) Contract IS to Acquire Engineering and Related Services to the Mechanical Systems Division (MSD), the Software Engineering Division (SED), the Instrument Systems and Technology Division (istd), the Electrical Engineering Division (EED), and the Mission Engineering and Systems Analysis Division (mesa) and Related Organizations Under Aetd, AS Required, for the Formulation, Design, Development, Non-Flight Fabrication, Integration, Testing, Verification, and Operations of Space Flight and Ground System Hardware and Software, Including Development and Validation of NEW Technologies to Enable Future Space and Science Missions. the Emphases in Engineering Services ARE in the Areas of Systems Engineering, Software Engineering, Information Technology, and Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) Services. to This END, the Contractor Provides On/Off-Site Multidisciplinary Engineering Services, Pursuant to Task Assignments Issued by the Contracting Officer — $133.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Program Analysis and Control — $104.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Satellite and Ground Command and Control — $98.0M (Department of Defense)
- Services to Support the Operation, Maintenance and Logistics of the Peterson-Schriever Garrison Information and Communications Systems — $69.3M (Department of Defense)
View all Asrc Federal System Solutions LLC federal contracts →
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 →