NASA's $113M security contract with Space Gateway Support, LLC, lacked competition and ran for 8 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $113,107,168 ($113.1M)
Contractor: Space Gateway Support, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2009-04-01
End Date: 2017-03-31
Contract Duration: 2,921 days
Daily Burn Rate: $38.7K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IPSC - INTERIM PROTECTIVE SERVICES CONTRACT
Place of Performance
Location: ORLANDO, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32899
State: Florida Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $113.1 million to SPACE GATEWAY SUPPORT, LLC for work described as: IPSC - INTERIM PROTECTIVE SERVICES CONTRACT Key points: 1. The contract's duration of 8 years (2921 days) suggests a long-term need for security services. 2. A Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 3. The absence of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and lack of innovation. 4. The contract was awarded to a single entity, indicating a sole-source or limited competition scenario. 5. The primary service provided is security guards and patrol, a critical function for government facilities. 6. The contract's value of over $113 million over its lifespan warrants scrutiny of its cost-effectiveness.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without comparable sole-source security contracts. However, the CPFF structure, combined with a lack of competition over an eight-year period, suggests a potential for costs to exceed market rates. The fixed fee component provides some cost control, but the 'cost plus' element means the government bears the risk of increased direct costs. Further analysis would require detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to industry standards for similar security services.
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 among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required goods or services, or in cases of urgent need. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery and innovation that typically arise from a competitive bidding process. This can potentially lead to higher prices and less favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bids, there's less assurance that the price reflects the most economical option available in the market.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's facilities in Florida, which receive security guard and patrol services. The contract ensures the physical security and safety of critical government assets and personnel. The geographic impact is localized to Florida, where the services are performed. The contract supports jobs for security personnel employed by Space Gateway Support, LLC.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition may have resulted in higher costs for taxpayers.
- CPFF contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
- Long contract duration (8 years) without re-competition limits opportunities for cost savings or service improvements.
- Sole-source award raises questions about the justification for not seeking competitive bids.
Positive Signals
- Ensured continuous security coverage for NASA facilities over an extended period.
- Provided a stable service provider, potentially minimizing disruption.
- The fixed fee component offers some predictability in contractor profit.
Sector Analysis
The security services sector is a significant part of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This contract falls under the security guards and patrol services sub-sector. Government contracts for security are common across various agencies, often involving extensive requirements for personnel, equipment, and compliance. The market size for government security contracts is substantial, driven by the need to protect federal assets and personnel nationwide. This specific contract represents a notable investment in maintaining operational security for a key federal agency.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The sole-source nature of the award further limits opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific contract. This means the primary contractor, Space Gateway Support, LLC, likely handled all aspects of the service delivery without significant involvement from the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, NASA would have been responsible for monitoring the contractor's costs to ensure they were reasonable and allowable. Transparency would depend on NASA's internal reporting and any public disclosures made. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Security Contracts
- Federal Security Guard Services
- Cost-Plus Contracts
- Sole-Source Procurements
- Space Operations Support
Risk Flags
- Lack of Competition
- Cost Plus Contract Type Risk
- Long Contract Duration
- Sole-Source Justification Unclear
Tags
nasa, space-operations, security-services, florida, definitive-contract, cost-plus-fixed-fee, sole-source, large-contract, national-aeronautics-and-space-administration, security-guards-and-patrol-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $113.1 million to SPACE GATEWAY SUPPORT, LLC. IPSC - INTERIM PROTECTIVE SERVICES CONTRACT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SPACE GATEWAY SUPPORT, 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 $113.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-04-01. End: 2017-03-31.
What was the specific justification provided by NASA 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 justified under circumstances such as only one responsible source being available, or an urgent and compelling need that would cause unacceptable delays if a competitive process were followed. NASA would have had to document and approve this justification internally, and potentially submit it for public notice. Without access to the contract file or NASA's procurement records, the precise rationale remains unknown from this dataset.
How did the total cost of this contract compare to similar security contracts awarded by NASA or other federal agencies during the same period?
Direct comparison is difficult without specific cost breakdowns and details of the services rendered. However, the total value of $113 million over approximately 8 years averages to about $14 million per year. This figure needs to be contextualized by the scope of services, number of personnel, geographic coverage, and specific security requirements. Given the sole-source nature and CPFF structure, there's a risk that this annual average might be higher than what could have been achieved through a competitive process. Benchmarking would require identifying contracts with similar service levels and contract types.
What were the primary risks identified by NASA when awarding this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, and what mitigation strategies were in place?
The primary risk associated with a CPFF contract is the potential for cost overruns, as the government assumes the risk of increased direct costs incurred by the contractor. NASA's mitigation strategies would typically involve robust oversight of the contractor's incurred costs, detailed audits, and clear definitions of allowable and unallowable expenses within the contract terms. The fixed fee provides some incentive for the contractor to manage costs efficiently to protect their profit margin. However, the effectiveness of these mitigations depends heavily on the diligence of NASA's contract administration.
What performance metrics or key performance indicators (KPIs) were used to evaluate Space Gateway Support, LLC's performance under this contract?
The provided data does not specify the performance metrics or KPIs used for this contract. For security contracts, common KPIs often include response times to incidents, adherence to post orders, personnel reliability, incident reporting accuracy, and overall security posture effectiveness. NASA's contract administration would have been responsible for monitoring these metrics and ensuring Space Gateway Support, LLC met the required standards throughout the contract's duration. Failure to meet KPIs could have led to contractual remedies.
What was the historical spending pattern for security services at NASA's Florida facilities prior to and following this contract?
The data provided only covers this specific contract (2009-2017). To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to examine NASA's procurement data for security services at its Florida locations for periods before April 2009 and after March 2017. This would involve searching for other contracts, potentially with different providers or contract types, to identify trends in spending, changes in service providers, and shifts in contract values or competition levels over time.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Guards and Patrol Services
Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1980 N ATLANTIC AVE STE 330, COCOA BEACH, FL, 32931
Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $122,429,324
Exercised Options: $119,207,979
Current Obligation: $113,107,168
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-04-01
Current End Date: 2017-03-31
Potential End Date: 2017-03-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2017-03-30
More Contracts from Space Gateway Support, LLC
- Joint Base Operations and Support for KSC, Cape Canaveral AIR Force Station and Patrick AIR Force Base (j-Bosc) — $2.5B (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 →