NASA's $125.9M Marshall Integrated Program Support Services contract awarded to Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $125,891,098 ($125.9M)
Contractor: Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2013-11-18
End Date: 2021-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,873 days
Daily Burn Rate: $43.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF TASK ORDER(TO)TO PROVIDE THE MARSHALL INTEGRATED PROGRAM SUPPORT SERVICES (MIPSS) PROGRAMMATIC SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS(SME) SERVICES AT MARSHAL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35812
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $125.9 million to MANUFACTURING TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF TASK ORDER(TO)TO PROVIDE THE MARSHALL INTEGRATED PROGRAM SUPPORT SERVICES (MIPSS) PROGRAMMATIC SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS(SME) SERVICES AT MARSHAL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER Key points: 1. The contract, a BPA Call under a larger agreement, was awarded through full and open competition. 2. Services provided are engineering and programmatic subject matter expertise for the Marshall Space Flight Center. 3. The contract duration spans nearly eight years, from late 2013 to late 2021. 4. The contract type is Time and Materials, which can pose cost control challenges. 5. The awarded amount represents a significant investment in specialized program support. 6. The contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor did it involve specific subcontracting goals. 7. The agency and servicing agency are both NASA, indicating internal program support. 8. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to engineering services.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable service contracts. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, can lead to higher costs if not closely managed, especially over a nearly eight-year period. The total obligated amount of $125.9 million suggests a substantial need for specialized expertise. However, without detailed breakdowns of labor categories, rates, and hours worked, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. The number of bidders (7) suggests some level of competition, which should theoretically drive reasonable pricing, but the T&M nature requires diligent oversight.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. Seven bidders participated in the competition, suggesting a healthy level of interest and a reasonable degree of market engagement. This competitive process is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring that the government receives competitive offers. The BPA Call mechanism implies that this task order was competed among pre-qualified vendors under an existing Blanket Purchase Agreement.
Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive price than a sole-source or limited competition award, potentially saving taxpayer dollars through market forces.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and its various space exploration and development programs. The contract delivers critical programmatic subject matter expertise, essential for the successful execution of complex space missions. Services are geographically concentrated at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama. The contract supports a cadre of specialized technical and programmatic professionals, impacting the aerospace engineering workforce. This support is crucial for maintaining the operational efficiency and technical integrity of ongoing and future NASA projects.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The Time and Materials (T&M) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not meticulously managed and monitored for labor hours and rates.
- The long duration of the contract (nearly 8 years) increases the risk of scope creep and potential for escalating costs without periodic re-evaluation.
- Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's efficiency and effectiveness beyond basic delivery.
- The absence of small business set-aside or subcontracting goals may limit opportunities for smaller firms within the aerospace support ecosystem.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition with seven bidders, indicating a competitive process that should foster reasonable pricing.
- The contract provides essential programmatic subject matter expertise, directly supporting critical NASA missions and objectives.
- The long-term nature of the contract suggests a stable and ongoing need for these specialized services, indicating a well-defined requirement.
- The contractor, Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC, has secured a significant contract, implying a level of capability and trust from the agency.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting aerospace and defense programs. The NAICS code 541330, Engineering Services, encompasses firms that provide engineering consulting and design services. The market for such services is substantial, driven by government and private sector investments in complex technological projects, including space exploration, defense systems, and advanced manufacturing. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by agencies like NASA, DoD, or other federal entities requiring specialized technical expertise.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses based on the provided data. This means that opportunities for small businesses to directly participate in this specific contract are limited. While the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors, there are no explicit mandates or goals indicated. This could potentially limit the direct economic impact on the small business ecosystem within the aerospace support sector for this particular award.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), specifically the Marshall Space Flight Center. As a BPA Call awarded under full and open competition, standard contract administration processes would apply, including monitoring of performance, costs, and adherence to contract terms. The Time and Materials nature necessitates close tracking of labor hours and rates. Transparency is generally facilitated through federal contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Operations Support Contracts
- Aerospace Engineering Services Contracts
- Program Management Support Services
- Space Exploration Technology Development Contracts
- Federal Engineering Consulting Services
Risk Flags
- Time and Materials Contract Type
- Long Contract Duration
- Lack of Specific Performance Metrics
- No Small Business Subcontracting Goals
Tags
engineering-services, nasa, marshall-space-flight-center, alabama, full-and-open-competition, bpa-call, time-and-materials, programmatic-support, subject-matter-experts, large-contract, aerospace, federal-agency
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $125.9 million to MANUFACTURING TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF TASK ORDER(TO)TO PROVIDE THE MARSHALL INTEGRATED PROGRAM SUPPORT SERVICES (MIPSS) PROGRAMMATIC SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS(SME) SERVICES AT MARSHAL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is MANUFACTURING TECHNICAL 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 $125.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2013-11-18. End: 2021-09-30.
What is the track record of Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC with NASA and other federal agencies?
Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC (MTS) has a history of securing contracts with NASA and other federal agencies, primarily in areas related to engineering, technical support, and program management. While specific details on past performance metrics for this particular contract are not provided, MTS's ability to win a significant award like the Marshall Integrated Program Support Services (MIPSS) contract suggests a demonstrated capability to meet agency requirements. Federal procurement data typically tracks contract awards, modifications, and sometimes past performance evaluations. A deeper dive into MTS's contract history would reveal the types of services they have provided, the agencies they have served, and potentially their performance ratings on previous engagements. This information is crucial for assessing their reliability and expertise in fulfilling complex programmatic SME roles.
How does the $125.9 million total value compare to similar engineering support contracts at NASA?
The $125.9 million total value for the Marshall Integrated Program Support Services (MIPSS) contract is substantial, reflecting the long duration (nearly 8 years) and the specialized nature of programmatic subject matter expertise required by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. To benchmark this value, one would compare it to other large-scale engineering, technical, and program support contracts awarded by NASA or similar agencies like the Department of Defense. For instance, other major NASA centers (e.g., Johnson, Kennedy, JPL) often award multi-year contracts for mission operations, systems engineering, and research support that can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. The key comparison points would be the scope of services, the duration, the labor mix (e.g., engineers, scientists, project managers), and the criticality of the support provided. Given the complexity of spaceflight programs, this level of funding is not unusual for comprehensive support services.
What are the primary risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract of this magnitude and duration?
The primary risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract of this magnitude ($125.9M) and duration (nearly 8 years) revolve around cost control and potential for overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M contracts reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours at specified rates and for actual material costs. This structure places a significant burden on the government to meticulously monitor and control the contractor's labor hours, ensure that the rates are fair and reasonable, and verify that the work performed is necessary and efficient. Without robust oversight, there is a heightened risk that costs could escalate beyond initial projections due to inefficiencies, scope creep, or inflated labor rates. Furthermore, the long duration increases the likelihood of unforeseen changes or evolving requirements, which can be more complex to manage under a T&M framework compared to a contract with more defined deliverables and fixed pricing.
How effective is full and open competition in ensuring competitive pricing for specialized engineering services like these?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring competitive pricing for specialized engineering services. By allowing all responsible sources to submit proposals, the government maximizes the pool of potential bidders, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving multiple competitive offers. This competitive pressure incentivizes contractors to propose realistic and competitive pricing to win the contract. In this case, with seven bidders participating in the competition for the Marshall Integrated Program Support Services (MIPSS) contract, the process likely yielded a more favorable price than a sole-source or limited competition award. However, the effectiveness is also contingent on the clarity of the solicitation, the evaluation criteria, and the specific market dynamics for the specialized expertise required.
What are the historical spending patterns for engineering and program support services at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center?
Historical spending patterns for engineering and program support services at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) typically show a consistent and significant investment in these areas due to the center's role in developing and managing major spaceflight hardware and programs (e.g., propulsion, structures, payloads). MSFC relies heavily on specialized engineering expertise and programmatic support to execute its missions. Spending in this category often involves large, multi-year contracts, awarded through various mechanisms including full and open competition, competitive prototypes, and sometimes sole-source awards for highly specialized capabilities. The total spending fluctuates based on the lifecycle stage of major programs, new initiatives, and budget allocations. The MIPSS contract represents a substantial portion of such spending over its nearly eight-year period, reflecting the ongoing need for critical support services at MSFC.
What are the implications of this contract not being a small business set-aside for the small business ecosystem?
The implications of this contract not being a small business set-aside for the small business ecosystem are that direct prime contracting opportunities for small businesses are limited to zero for this specific award. While the prime contractor, Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC, may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses, there is no contractual obligation or set-aside requirement mandating this. This means that smaller firms in the aerospace engineering and program support sector may not directly benefit from this large contract unless they are selected as subcontractors. The absence of specific subcontracting goals also means there's no guaranteed flow-down of work. This can be a missed opportunity for fostering small business growth and participation in major federal programs, particularly in specialized fields where small businesses often provide innovative solutions.
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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 308 VOYAGER WAY NW # 100, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35806
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $132,722,401
Exercised Options: $129,310,717
Current Obligation: $125,891,098
Actual Outlays: $51,403,865
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNM13AA04Z
IDV Type: BPA
Timeline
Start Date: 2013-11-18
Current End Date: 2021-09-30
Potential End Date: 2021-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-06-05
More Contracts from Manufacturing Technical Solutions, LLC
- Task Order(to)to Provide the Marshall Integrated Program Support Services (mipss) Project Coordination (PC) Services AT Marshal Space Flight Center — $100.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Task Order (to)to Provide the Marshall Integrated Program Support Services (mipss) Program Planning and Control (PP&C) Services AT Marshal Space Flight Center — $80.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all Manufacturing Technical 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 →