NASA's $250M METTS contract to Interfuze Corporation for R&D support shows a long duration and cost-plus award fee structure
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $250,781,663 ($250.8M)
Contractor: Interfuze Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2008-03-01
End Date: 2015-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,769 days
Daily Burn Rate: $90.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: MARSHALL ENGINEERING TECHNICIANS AND TRADES SUPPORT (METTS) SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35812
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $250.8 million to INTERFUZE CORPORATION for work described as: MARSHALL ENGINEERING TECHNICIANS AND TRADES SUPPORT (METTS) SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract's extensive 9-year duration suggests a need for sustained support in complex research and development activities. 2. A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure indicates performance incentives tied to achieving specific objectives, potentially driving efficiency. 3. The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' requiring careful review of the justification for exclusion. 4. The significant total award amount points to a substantial investment in specialized engineering and trades support for NASA's R&D. 5. The geographic location in Alabama may indicate a concentration of NASA's research facilities or specific project needs in that region. 6. The NAICS code 541712 suggests a focus on physical, engineering, and life sciences research, excluding biotechnology.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics and comparable contract data. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, while common for R&D, can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. The long duration of nearly 8 years suggests a potentially stable, albeit high, cost for sustained services. Without detailed breakdowns of labor categories, overhead, and award fee criteria, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This procurement method implies that while competition was sought, certain sources were excluded, necessitating a clear justification for such exclusions. The number of bidders is not specified, but the exclusion of sources suggests a potentially narrower competitive field than a purely full and open competition.
Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources, even with initial open competition, may limit the potential for the most competitive pricing, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers if the excluded sources could have offered better value.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's research and development initiatives by providing essential engineering and technical support. Services delivered likely include specialized technical expertise, laboratory support, and skilled trades for research projects. Geographic impact is concentrated in Alabama, where NASA facilities are located, supporting local employment and economic activity. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled technicians and engineers, contributing to the specialized workforce in the aerospace sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost creep under the CPAF structure if award criteria are not rigorously defined and monitored.
- Justification for 'Exclusion of Sources' needs thorough vetting to ensure fair competition principles were upheld.
- Long contract duration could lead to vendor lock-in or reduced agility in adapting to evolving research needs.
Positive Signals
- CPAF structure incentivizes contractor performance towards specific R&D goals.
- Long duration indicates a stable, long-term need for specialized services, suggesting a well-defined requirement.
- Awarded to a single contractor implies a potentially streamlined management process for NASA.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The aerospace industry, a significant consumer of R&D services, often requires long-term, specialized support like that provided under this contract. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale R&D support contracts within NASA and other federal agencies, considering the specific scientific disciplines and service requirements.
Small Business Impact
The contract details do not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. Given the nature and scale of the contract, it is likely that the prime contractor, Interfuze Corporation, would be responsible for managing the overall effort. Any subcontracting would depend on the specific technical needs and the prime contractor's strategy, with potential opportunities for specialized small businesses if they possess unique capabilities.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure necessitates robust performance monitoring and evaluation to ensure the contractor meets objectives and earns award fees appropriately. Transparency would be facilitated through contract reporting requirements and potentially through NASA's public contract databases, though detailed performance data may be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Engineering and Technical Services Contracts
- Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
- Aerospace R&D Support
Risk Flags
- Justification for Exclusion of Sources requires scrutiny.
- Potential for cost escalation under CPAF structure.
- Long contract duration may lead to reduced agility.
Tags
research-and-development, nasa, alabama, definitive-contract, large-contract, limited-competition, cost-plus-award-fee, engineering-services, technical-support, aerospace
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $250.8 million to INTERFUZE CORPORATION. MARSHALL ENGINEERING TECHNICIANS AND TRADES SUPPORT (METTS) SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is INTERFUZE CORPORATION.
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 $250.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-03-01. End: 2015-09-30.
What specific R&D projects or programs did this METTS contract support for NASA?
The METTS (Marshall Engineering Technicians and Trades Support) Services contract, awarded to Interfuze Corporation, was designed to provide comprehensive engineering, technical, and trades support to NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). While specific project details are often proprietary or classified due to the nature of R&D, the contract's scope would have encompassed support for various research initiatives, including but not limited to, propulsion systems development, materials science research, space systems engineering, and advanced manufacturing technologies. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure suggests that the contractor's performance was tied to achieving specific milestones and objectives within these R&D efforts, indicating a direct link to NASA's mission-critical research goals. The long duration of the contract implies sustained support across multiple phases of research and development.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure compare to other contract types for similar R&D services?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure is frequently utilized for research and development contracts where the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, or where innovation and performance quality are paramount. Unlike fixed-price contracts, CPAF allows for the reimbursement of actual costs incurred by the contractor, plus a base fee and an additional award fee contingent upon meeting or exceeding performance targets. This contrasts with Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which offers a fixed fee regardless of performance, or Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), where the fee is adjusted based on cost targets. For R&D, CPAF offers flexibility and incentivizes high performance, but it requires robust government oversight to manage costs and ensure award fees are justified. It is generally considered more expensive than fixed-price options but can yield better results for complex, evolving projects.
What are the potential risks associated with the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award type?
The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award type presents specific risks primarily related to the justification for excluding certain potential bidders. While it aims to maintain a competitive environment, the exclusion implies that some capable sources were deliberately not considered. The risk lies in whether the exclusion was adequately justified and documented, ensuring it did not unduly restrict competition or lead to a suboptimal outcome for the government. If the exclusion was not based on sound reasoning (e.g., unique capabilities, national security), taxpayers could face higher costs or reduced innovation. Thorough review of the justification is crucial to mitigate the risk that the competition was less robust than it could have been, potentially impacting price discovery and overall value.
What is the historical spending trend for similar R&D support services at NASA?
Historical spending trends for similar R&D support services at NASA indicate a consistent and significant investment in specialized technical and engineering expertise. Agencies like NASA, heavily reliant on innovation and complex project execution, often award long-term, high-value contracts for R&D support. Spending in this category typically fluctuates based on the agency's strategic priorities, budget allocations, and the initiation of new major research programs. While specific figures for R&D support services vary year to year, the overall trend shows a sustained need for contractors to provide essential services that complement in-house capabilities. Analyzing past contract awards for similar services can reveal patterns in contract duration, value, and the types of contractors that are successful, providing context for the $250 million METTS contract.
How does the long duration (2769 days) of this contract impact its overall value and risk profile?
The long duration of 2769 days (approximately 7.6 years) for the METTS contract has significant implications for both its value and risk profile. On the value side, a long-term contract can provide stability and predictability for both the government and the contractor, potentially leading to economies of scale and reduced administrative burden associated with frequent re-procurement. It allows the contractor to invest in specialized resources and personnel. However, a long duration also increases risks. Market conditions, technological advancements, and program requirements can change substantially over such a period, potentially making the contracted services less relevant or more expensive than alternatives. There's also a risk of contractor complacency or 'vendor lock-in,' where the government becomes overly reliant on a single provider, potentially diminishing future competitive leverage. Effective contract management and flexibility clauses are crucial to mitigate these risks.
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: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: NNM08125357R
Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 6705 ODYSSEY DR, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35806
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, HUBZone Firm, Manufacturer of Goods, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, Woman Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $278,578,644
Exercised Options: $257,355,094
Current Obligation: $250,781,663
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-03-01
Current End Date: 2015-09-30
Potential End Date: 2015-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2021-07-15
More Contracts from Interfuze Corporation
- Environmental AIR Monitoring Contractor Logistics Support (EAM CLS) — $23.1M (Department of Defense)
- Defense Cbrn Response Force (dcrf) Sustainment and Refresh Contractor Logistics Support — $21.1M (Department of Defense)
- 200409!044003!1700!RA13A !fleet & Industrial Supply Center!n0014003p0198 !A!N! !Y! !p00004!20031001!20040930!177103918!177103918!177103918!n!infopro Corporation !202 Exchange Place !huntsville !al!35806!20050!091!12!eglin AFB !okaloosa !florida !+000001063727!n!n!000000000000!s203!food Services !S1 !services !000 !* !611310!E! !9! ! !H! ! !99990909!d!f!n!a! !A!N!J!2!009! ! !C!N!Z! ! !y!b!y!n! ! !A! !B!A!00 !A!B!N! ! ! ! ! !N62640!0001! ! — $17.1M (Department of Defense)
- 47qfna19k00220310 Jpeo Cbrnd Navy Sustainment Cnic — $14.8M (General Services 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 →