NASA's $49.7M R&D contract with Amentum Technology, Inc. spans a decade, ending in 2014
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $49,708,158 ($49.7M)
Contractor: Amentum Technology, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2004-01-30
End Date: 2014-07-31
Contract Duration: 3,835 days
Daily Burn Rate: $13.0K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 8
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: RESEARCH OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND ENGINEERING
Place of Performance
Location: HAMPTON, HAMPTON CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23681
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $49.7 million to AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC. for work described as: RESEARCH OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND ENGINEERING Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in research operations and engineering support. 2. The full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process. 3. The contract's long duration (over 10 years) may indicate stable, ongoing needs. 4. Performance was likely assessed against established R&D metrics. 5. This contract falls within the broad R&D sector, specifically physical, engineering, and life sciences. 6. The absence of small business set-asides means opportunities for smaller firms were not specifically prioritized. 7. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure incentivizes cost control while allowing for profit. 8. The contract was awarded by NASA, a key agency for scientific and technological advancement.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking this contract's value is challenging without specific deliverables or comparable projects. The total award value of nearly $50 million over more than 10 years suggests a substantial, long-term commitment. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) pricing structure, while common for R&D, can lead to higher costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed carefully. Without detailed performance metrics or comparisons to similar R&D support contracts, assessing the true value-for-money is difficult.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This typically fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and innovation. The presence of 8 bids suggests a healthy level of interest from the market, providing NASA with a range of options to evaluate.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs and ensuring that the government receives the best possible value for its investment.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's research initiatives, which receive essential operational, maintenance, and engineering support. The contract supports advanced research and development activities within the physical, engineering, and life sciences. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around NASA facilities where the research operations are conducted. The contract supports a workforce engaged in specialized scientific and engineering roles.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The long duration of the contract (over 10 years) could potentially lead to complacency or reduced urgency if not actively managed.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, while flexible for R&D, carry a risk of cost overruns if not rigorously monitored.
- The lack of specific details on performance metrics makes it difficult to fully assess the contractor's effectiveness throughout the contract period.
- The absence of small business participation may limit opportunities for innovation and economic inclusion from smaller enterprises.
Positive Signals
- The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating a thorough vetting of potential contractors.
- The significant number of bids received (8) suggests a competitive marketplace and strong interest in supporting NASA's mission.
- The contract's long-term nature implies a successful, ongoing relationship and consistent delivery of required services.
- The CPFF structure, when managed effectively, allows for flexibility in R&D projects with evolving requirements.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541710 (Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences). This sector is characterized by innovation, scientific discovery, and technological advancement. Spending in this area is crucial for national competitiveness and progress. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale R&D support contracts awarded by government agencies to entities providing similar operational, maintenance, and engineering services.
Small Business Impact
This contract did not include specific small business set-asides, nor is there an indication of significant subcontracting to small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate directly in this contract were not a primary consideration during the procurement process. While this may not directly impact the small business ecosystem negatively, it represents a missed opportunity to leverage the agility and innovation of smaller firms within this specific R&D support effort.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would have been primarily managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be embedded within the contract's terms, including performance standards, reporting requirements, and payment milestones tied to successful delivery. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and public reporting, though specific performance details might be proprietary. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Aerospace Engineering Services
- Scientific Research Support
- Government Operations and Maintenance Contracts
- Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contracts
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration
- Cost-plus pricing structure
- Lack of specific performance metrics detail
- No small business set-aside
Tags
research-and-development, nasa, amentum-technology-inc, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-fixed-fee, operations-and-maintenance, engineering-services, multi-year-contract, virginia, delivery-order
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $49.7 million to AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, INC.. RESEARCH OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND ENGINEERING
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is AMENTUM TECHNOLOGY, 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 $49.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2004-01-30. End: 2014-07-31.
What was Amentum Technology, Inc.'s track record with NASA prior to and during this contract?
Assessing Amentum Technology, Inc.'s track record requires examining their contract history with NASA and other federal agencies. Prior to this specific contract (awarded in 2004), Amentum likely had existing contracts demonstrating their capabilities in research operations, maintenance, and engineering. During the contract's tenure (ending 2014), NASA's oversight would have involved performance evaluations, potentially documented through contract performance reports (CPARs). A comprehensive review would involve searching federal procurement databases for past performance information, any disputes or claims filed, and overall satisfaction ratings from previous government engagements. Without direct access to CPARs or internal NASA evaluations for this specific contract, a definitive statement on their track record is limited to the general understanding that they were awarded a significant, long-term contract, implying a satisfactory performance history at the time of award.
How does the total contract value compare to similar R&D support contracts awarded by NASA or other agencies?
Comparing the $49.7 million total award value of this NASA contract to similar R&D support contracts requires identifying comparable procurements based on scope, duration, and agency. Contracts for 'Research Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering' can vary widely. A decade-long contract of this magnitude suggests a significant scope of work, potentially encompassing multiple facilities or complex research support functions. For instance, other large federal agencies like the Department of Defense or Department of Energy might award similar multi-year contracts for laboratory support, facility maintenance, and specialized engineering services. Benchmarking would involve looking at contracts with similar NAICS codes (e.g., 541710, 541720) and contract types (e.g., CPFF, CPAF) awarded around the same period. Without specific comparable contract data readily available, it's difficult to definitively state if $49.7 million over 10+ years is high, low, or average, but it indicates a substantial commitment.
What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract?
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a contract focused on 'Research Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering' would typically revolve around the reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness of the services provided. For operations and maintenance, KPIs might include facility uptime, response times for service requests, preventative maintenance completion rates, and adherence to safety protocols. For engineering support, KPIs could relate to project completion timelines, successful implementation of technical solutions, quality of engineering designs or analyses, and contribution to research milestones. Given the R&D context, KPIs might also be tied to supporting the successful execution of specific research projects funded under the contract. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure implies that meeting defined performance standards would be crucial for the contractor to achieve their fixed fee.
What was the rationale for using a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this R&D effort?
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often chosen for Research and Development (R&D) efforts because R&D projects inherently involve a high degree of uncertainty regarding scope, technical challenges, and final costs. In a CPFF contract, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing their profit. This structure provides flexibility for the contractor to adapt to evolving research requirements and unforeseen technical hurdles without the immediate financial risk associated with fixed-price contracts. For NASA, this means they can pursue innovative research where the exact path and cost are not fully predictable. The 'fixed fee' component incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently, as their profit is capped and not directly tied to the total cost incurred, unlike a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract.
How did the full and open competition impact the final price and quality of services received?
A full and open competition generally aims to maximize both price competition and the quality of services received. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, NASA likely received multiple proposals from various companies, each offering different approaches, technical solutions, and pricing structures. This competitive pressure typically drives down the offered price as contractors vie for the award. Furthermore, a wider pool of bidders increases the likelihood that a contractor with superior technical capabilities or innovative solutions will emerge. The fact that 8 bids were received suggests a robust competition. While the specific impact on the final price and quality cannot be quantified without comparing it to a sole-source or limited competition scenario, the process itself is designed to yield the best value for the government by fostering a dynamic marketplace.
What is the significance of the contract ending in July 2014, and were there subsequent contracts for similar services?
The contract's end date of July 31, 2014, signifies the completion of the defined period of performance for the 'Research Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering' services provided by Amentum Technology, Inc. for NASA. The significance lies in the transition point it represents; after this date, NASA would have needed to either re-compete the requirement, extend the existing contract (if options remained), or transition the services to a new contractor. To determine if subsequent contracts were awarded for similar services, one would need to search federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) for contracts issued by NASA with similar descriptions, NAICS codes, and service requirements following July 2014. This would reveal whether the need for these services continued and how NASA chose to fulfill it moving forward.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 8
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc
Address: 600 WILLIAM NORTHERN BLVD, TULLAHOMA, TN, 37388
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $110,350,000
Exercised Options: $110,350,000
Current Obligation: $49,708,158
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNL04AA03B
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2004-01-30
Current End Date: 2014-07-31
Potential End Date: 2014-07-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-04-11
More Contracts from Amentum Technology, Inc.
- THE Test and Operations Support Contract (tosc) IS a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee Contract With an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Task Ordering Provision. Tosc Provides a Processing Contract for the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Supporting Multiple Customers. the Scope of This Contract Includes Program Management and Control; Safety and Mission Assurance; Information Management; Processing Support Systems and Integration; Flight Hardware Processing; Ground Systems Operations, Maintenance and Sustaining Engineering; Logistics and Spaceport Services. Tosc Provides Overall Management and Implementation of Ground Systems Capabilities, Flight Hardware Processing and Launch Operations AT KSC in Florida. These Tasks Will Support the International Space Station, Ground Systems Development and Operations, and the Space Launch System, Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle and Launch Services Programs. Tosc Also Provides Ground Processing for Launch Vehicles, Spacecraft and Payloads in Support of Emerging Programs, Commercial Entities and Other Government Agencies AS Designated by the Government. Services Include Advanced Planning and Special Studies; Development of Designated Ground Systems; Operational Support for Design and Development of Flight Hardware and Ground Systems; Spacecraft, Payload, and Launch Vehicle Servicing and Processing; Ground Systems Services; and Logistics and Other Processing Support Services. Flight Hardware Processing and Servicing Activities Include Assembly, Integration, Checkout, and Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair. Launch Vehicle and Spacecraft Operations Include Advanced Planning, Element Processing, Integration, Test, Launch and Recovery Services. Ground Systems Services Include Operations, Maintenance and Validation of Associated Ground Systems and Support Equipment Necessary for Human Space Flight and Exploration. Contract Activities Will BE Performed in the Most Cost-Effective and Efficient Manner Supporting the Government S Priorities for Safety, Mission Success, Customer Satisfaction and Innovation While Maintaining Flexibility and Responsiveness to Changing Requirements. With the Award of This Contract, KSC IS Positioning Itself for the Next ERA of Space Exploration. KSC IS Transitioning to a 21st-Century Launch Facility With Multiple Users, Both Private and Government. a Dynamic Infrastructure IS Taking Shape, Designed to Host Many Kinds of Spacecraft and Rockets Sending People on America's Next Voyages in Space — $2.1B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Engineering Science Contract — $1.9B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Engineering Services and Science Capability Augmentation (essca) — $1.9B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Enterprise Core Services (enduring) — $979.2M (Department of Defense)
- Engineering Science and Technology — $874.0M (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 →