NASA's $11.3M ESMD & ICE Development contract awarded to INDYNE, INC. for computer systems design
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $11,297,892 ($11.3M)
Contractor: Indyne, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2006-10-01
End Date: 2012-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,191 days
Daily Burn Rate: $5.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: IT
Official Description: ESMD & ICE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
Place of Performance
Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20546
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $11.3 million to INDYNE, INC. for work described as: ESMD & ICE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes contractor performance. 3. The duration of the contract is 2191 days, indicating a long-term project. 4. The contract was awarded by NASA's National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 5. The primary service category is Computer Systems Design Services. 6. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order, suggesting it's part of a larger contract vehicle.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this $11.3 million contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for flexibility in pricing based on performance, which can lead to variable final costs. However, the absence of detailed cost breakdowns and performance evaluations makes it difficult to definitively assess value for money. Comparing it to similar computer systems design contracts within NASA or other agencies would provide better context for its pricing and overall value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The number of bidders is not specified, but this procurement method generally fosters a competitive environment. A competitive bidding process is expected to drive down prices and encourage innovation as contractors vie for the award. The specific details of the competition, such as the number of proposals received and the evaluation criteria, would offer further insight into the effectiveness of the competition.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining services at competitive prices and encourages a wider range of potential contractors, including small businesses.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA, which receives computer systems design services for its ESMD & ICE Development activities. The services delivered are crucial for the development and enhancement of specific NASA programs. The geographic impact is primarily within the District of Columbia, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for individuals with expertise in computer systems design and related fields.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value for money.
- The Cost Plus Award Fee structure can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
- Limited information on the number of bidders and the competitive landscape.
- The contract's long duration may present challenges in adapting to evolving technological needs.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process.
- The Cost Plus Award Fee structure incentivizes contractor performance.
- The contract supports critical NASA development activities.
- The contractor, INDYNE, INC., has secured a significant federal contract, indicating a level of established capability.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Computer Systems Design Services sector, a critical component of the IT industry. This sector is characterized by rapid technological advancements and a high demand for specialized expertise. The market size for IT services is substantial, with government contracts forming a significant portion. This specific contract likely supports NASA's unique requirements for its Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) and other initiatives, fitting within the broader landscape of federal IT spending.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the data does not indicate any specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears minimal. However, the prime contractor, INDYNE, INC., may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which would indirectly benefit them. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to fully assess the impact on small businesses.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers, ensuring adherence to the contract terms and performance standards. Accountability measures are embedded within the Cost Plus Award Fee structure, which links contractor compensation to performance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed performance reports are often internal. The Inspector General's office within NASA would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Information Technology Services Contracts
- Computer Systems Design Services
- Federal IT Procurement
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
- Risk of technological obsolescence over the contract's long duration.
- Dependence on a single contractor for critical development activities.
Tags
it, nasa, computer-systems-design, cost-plus-award-fee, delivery-order, full-and-open-competition, district-of-columbia, indyne-inc, esmd-ice-development-activities, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $11.3 million to INDYNE, INC.. ESMD & ICE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is INDYNE, 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 $11.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2006-10-01. End: 2012-09-30.
What is INDYNE, INC.'s track record with NASA and other federal agencies?
INDYNE, INC. has a history of securing federal contracts, including those with NASA. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those involving computer systems design and development, would provide insight into their reliability and capability. A review of their contract history might reveal patterns in contract types, award values, and any instances of performance issues or disputes. Understanding their broader federal contracting footprint can help assess their experience and suitability for complex projects like the ESMD & ICE Development activities.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure typically impact final contract costs compared to fixed-price contracts?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows the contractor to be reimbursed for allowable costs plus an additional fee that is based on performance against pre-defined criteria. This differs from fixed-price contracts where the price is set upfront. CPAF offers flexibility and can incentivize high performance by rewarding contractors for exceeding expectations. However, it also introduces uncertainty in the final cost, as the award fee component can vary significantly. If performance is exceptional, the total cost could exceed that of a well-managed fixed-price contract. Conversely, poor performance could result in a lower fee. Effective oversight and clearly defined award criteria are crucial to managing costs and ensuring value under a CPAF arrangement.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for INDYNE, INC. on this contract?
The specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for INDYNE, INC. on the ESMD & ICE Development Activities contract are not publicly detailed in the provided data. Typically, for a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, these KPIs would be outlined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or a similar document. They often relate to factors such as technical performance, schedule adherence, cost control, quality of deliverables, and customer satisfaction. Without access to the contract's specific award criteria, it is impossible to definitively state the KPIs. However, for a computer systems design contract, KPIs might include system functionality, reliability, integration success, and timely completion of development milestones.
What is the historical spending trend for NASA's ESMD & ICE Development Activities?
The provided data only details a single contract award of $11.3 million for ESMD & ICE Development Activities to INDYNE, INC. from 2006 to 2012. To understand the historical spending trend, one would need to analyze NASA's budget allocations and contract awards for these specific activities over a longer period. This would involve examining procurement data from previous fiscal years to identify the total investment in ESMD & ICE Development, the number and value of contracts awarded, and the primary contractors involved. Without this broader dataset, it's impossible to discern a trend, such as whether spending has increased, decreased, or remained stable over time.
What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration contract (2191 days) for computer systems design?
Long-duration contracts for computer systems design, such as this 2191-day (approximately 6-year) award, carry several potential risks. Technology evolves rapidly, and a system designed at the outset may become outdated or require significant modifications by the end of the contract period. This can lead to scope creep, increased costs for upgrades, or the need for contract renegotiations. Furthermore, maintaining contractor engagement and motivation over an extended period can be challenging. There's also a risk that the initial requirements may no longer align with the agency's strategic goals as they evolve. Effective contract management, including regular reviews and flexibility for technological advancements, is crucial to mitigate these risks.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 11800 SUNRISE VALLEY DR, RESTON, VA, 20191
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $11,809,731
Exercised Options: $11,809,731
Current Obligation: $11,297,892
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNH06CC93B
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2006-10-01
Current End Date: 2012-09-30
Potential End Date: 2012-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2018-11-28
More Contracts from Indyne, Inc.
- Federal Contract — $968.4M (Department of Defense)
- 200310!000264!5700!CA12 !30 Cons/Lgc !F0468403C0050 !A!N! !Y! !20030711!20030930!161909049!161909049!161909049!n!indyne, Inc !6862 ELM Street !mclean !va!22101!48376!059!51!mclean !fairfax !virginia !+000000400000!n!n!000047964924!r426!communications Services !S1 !services !3000!NOT Discernable or Classified !517110!A!B!3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!v!2!007!k! !C!Y!Z! ! !n!b!n!n! ! !C! !b!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $778.3M (Department of Defense)
- This IS a Continued Contract for FA2517-18-C-8000. Solid State Phased Array Radar System (sspars) Originally Awarded AS FA2517-18-C-8000, Providing Non-Personal Services to Perform Operations, Maintenance and Support 24/7 for the Sspars System — $348.4M (Department of Defense)
- 45 SW FY09 Funding for Ioms Sustainment — $282.2M (Department of Defense)
- Provide Communications Services, Telephone Service Requirements/Photo — $262.2M (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 →