NASA's $15.8M contract with Aerojet Rocketdyne for HAT Program Management shows a high cost per unit
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $15,810,381 ($15.8M)
Contractor: Aerojet Rocketdyne of DE, Inc
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2007-03-30
End Date: 2011-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,645 days
Daily Burn Rate: $9.6K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: HAT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Place of Performance
Location: STENNIS SPACE CENTER, HANCOCK County, MISSISSIPPI, 39529
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $15.8 million to AEROJET ROCKETDYNE OF DE, INC for work described as: HAT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT Key points: 1. The contract's cost-plus-award-fee structure may incentivize performance but can lead to cost overruns. 2. Aerojet Rocketdyne's track record with NASA warrants review for past performance and cost control. 3. The duration of the contract (1645 days) suggests a long-term need for these program management services. 4. The absence of small business participation raises questions about broader economic impact. 5. The contract's focus on R&D in physical, engineering, and life sciences indicates a specialized technical requirement. 6. The significant value of this contract within its specific NAICS code warrants benchmarking against similar R&D efforts.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking this contract's value is challenging without more specific details on the 'HAT Program Management' scope. However, the cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) structure, while offering flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher final costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed tightly. The total award amount of $15.8 million over approximately 4.5 years suggests a substantial investment in program management for R&D activities. Further analysis would require comparing the specific deliverables and outcomes against the costs incurred.
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 a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or when urgency dictates a rapid award. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery and potential cost savings that a competitive bidding process could have provided.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can result in higher costs for taxpayers as there is less pressure on the contractor to offer the most competitive pricing.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which receives program management support for its research and development initiatives. The services delivered are critical for the effective execution and oversight of complex R&D projects within the physical, engineering, and life sciences sectors. The geographic impact is centered around NASA's operations and potentially the contractor's facilities, though the specific locations are not detailed. Workforce implications include the employment of program managers, engineers, and support staff involved in overseeing R&D contracts.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
- Cost-plus-award-fee contract type can lead to cost escalation if not rigorously managed.
- Lack of small business participation may limit opportunities for smaller innovative firms.
- Limited transparency on specific program deliverables makes value assessment difficult.
Positive Signals
- Aerojet Rocketdyne is a known entity in the aerospace and defense sector, suggesting established expertise.
- The contract supports critical R&D efforts for NASA, aligning with national technological advancement goals.
- The award fee component, if structured effectively, can incentivize high performance and successful program outcomes.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically NAICS code 541710. This sector is characterized by innovation and the pursuit of new knowledge and applications. Spending in this area is crucial for technological advancement and maintaining a competitive edge. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale R&D management contracts within government agencies, particularly those focused on aerospace and advanced engineering.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, the contractor, Aerojet Rocketdyne, is a large business. This suggests that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific contract, either as prime contractors or through subcontracting, may be limited unless explicitly mandated or pursued by the prime. The absence of small business involvement could mean missed opportunities for fostering innovation within the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a sole-source award, NASA's contracting officers and program managers would be responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring adherence to the contract terms, and managing the cost-plus-award-fee structure. Transparency might be limited due to the sole-source nature and the proprietary aspects often associated with R&D. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Aerospace Program Management
- Cost-Plus-Award-Fee Contracts
- Sole-Source R&D Awards
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Cost-plus-award-fee structure
- Lack of competition
- Limited small business participation
Tags
research-and-development, nasa, aerojet-rocketdyne, program-management, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, mississippi, large-business, delivery-order, physical-sciences, engineering, life-sciences
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $15.8 million to AEROJET ROCKETDYNE OF DE, INC. HAT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is AEROJET ROCKETDYNE OF DE, 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 $15.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-03-30. End: 2011-09-30.
What specific 'HAT Program Management' activities were undertaken under this contract?
The provided data does not detail the specific activities encompassed by 'HAT Program Management.' This designation likely refers to a particular NASA initiative or project focused on advanced technology or a specific research area. To understand the scope, one would need to consult NASA's internal program documentation, project descriptions, or contract award justifications. These activities could range from strategic planning and resource allocation to technical oversight, risk management, and coordination of multiple research tasks or sub-contracts within the broader HAT initiative.
How does the cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) structure compare to other contract types for similar R&D management services?
Cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) contracts are common in R&D where the scope of work can be uncertain and performance-based incentives are desired. Unlike fixed-price contracts, CPAF allows the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a base fee, with an additional award fee tied to achieving specific performance objectives. This contrasts with cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), which has a predetermined fee, or firm-fixed-price (FFP), where the price is set regardless of costs. CPAF offers flexibility and incentivizes performance but requires robust oversight to manage costs effectively, as the final price is not fixed upfront. For R&D management, CPAF can be advantageous when innovation and achieving high-quality outcomes are paramount, but it carries a higher risk of cost overruns if performance metrics are not clearly defined or if the government's oversight is insufficient.
What is Aerojet Rocketdyne's performance history with NASA on similar contracts?
Aerojet Rocketdyne (now part of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc.) has a long history of contracting with NASA and other government agencies, primarily in propulsion systems and space exploration technologies. Accessing specific performance data for past contracts requires delving into NASA's contract performance databases (like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) or public contract award records. Generally, large, established contractors like Aerojet Rocketdyne have a mixed record, with periods of high praise for successful mission support and occasional critiques related to cost, schedule, or technical challenges. A thorough review would involve examining past CPARS reports, any contract disputes, and the overall success rate of programs they managed or supplied critical components for.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for R&D program management?
Sole-source awards for R&D program management carry several risks. Primarily, the lack of competition can lead to inflated pricing, as the contractor faces no market pressure to offer the most cost-effective solution. This can result in a lower value for taxpayer money. Secondly, without competitive proposals, there's a reduced opportunity to explore innovative approaches or alternative solutions that other firms might offer. The government may also miss out on potentially better-qualified contractors. Finally, sole-source awards can sometimes indicate a lack of strategic planning or market research, potentially leading to reliance on a single vendor for critical capabilities, which can create long-term dependency and limit future flexibility.
How does the $15.8 million contract value compare to NASA's overall R&D spending in the physical, engineering, and life sciences?
The $15.8 million contract value represents a specific investment in program management for a particular R&D area. NASA's total R&D budget is significantly larger, often in the billions of dollars annually, allocated across various scientific disciplines and mission directorates. For context, NASA's fiscal year 2023 budget request included substantial funding for science, aeronautics research, and exploration systems, all of which involve extensive R&D. This $15.8 million contract, while substantial for a single award, is a relatively small fraction of NASA's overall R&D expenditure. Its significance lies more in its specific application and the criticality of the program management it supports rather than its proportion of the total agency R&D budget.
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: QUALITY CONTROL, TEST, INSPECTION › EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS TESTING
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 001316330)
Address: 6633 CANOGA AVE, CANOGA PARK, CA, 91303
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $16,779,097
Exercised Options: $16,779,097
Current Obligation: $15,810,381
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNS07AA20C
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-03-30
Current End Date: 2011-09-30
Potential End Date: 2011-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2021-09-09
More Contracts from Aerojet Rocketdyne of DE, Inc
- RS-25 Production Restart to BE Undertaken by the Contractor in Support of Providing SIX RS-25 Engines Modified AS Necessary for the Technical Requirements Under the Space Launch System, Recertification of Production, Improvements in Manufacturing, and Certification for Flight Program — $3.2B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Space Shuttle ENG Support for Flight SCH of 30 FLI Flights Extending From 1/1/02 Thru 12/31/06 — $2.3B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Letter Contract to Initiate Ddt&e and Long Lead Purchases — $2.1B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Hardware Assurance Propulsion Testing, Test Support Services of Space Shuttle Main Engine Ssme — $116.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Design, Development, Production, and System Integration of a Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (mmrtg) — $95.8M (Department of Energy)
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 →