NIH awards $26.75M for biomedical research to University of Minnesota over 15 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,751,905 ($26.8M)

Contractor: University of Minnesota Twin C

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2000-09-27

End Date: 2015-07-16

Contract Duration: 5,405 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: BIOMEDICAL (BASIC)

Place of Performance

Location: SEATTLE, KING County, WASHINGTON, 98105, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $26.8 million to UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN C for work described as: BIOMEDICAL (BASIC) Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Long duration of 5,405 days (approx. 15 years) indicates a sustained research effort. 3. Award type 'COST NO FEE' suggests the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs without additional profit. 4. The contract was awarded to a single entity, the University of Minnesota. 5. This award falls under the 'BIOMEDICAL (BASIC)' category, indicating fundamental research. 6. The contract value of $26.75M over 15 years averages approximately $1.78M per year.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $26.75M over a 15-year period averages to approximately $1.78M annually. Without specific benchmarks for similar long-term basic biomedical research grants, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. The 'COST NO FEE' award type implies reimbursement of expenses rather than profit, which can be cost-effective for the government in research settings where outcomes are uncertain. However, the extended duration necessitates careful monitoring of progress and alignment with research goals.

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 a bid. The presence of 21 bids suggests a robust competitive environment for this research opportunity. A high number of bidders generally supports price discovery and can lead to more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this research award likely ensured that taxpayer funds were used efficiently, securing the best possible research services at a reasonable cost.

Public Impact

The University of Minnesota is the primary beneficiary, receiving funding for its research activities. The contract supports basic biomedical research, which could lead to advancements in health and medicine. The geographic impact is primarily centered around the University of Minnesota's research facilities. The contract supports academic researchers and potentially graduate students involved in the project.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (15 years) poses a risk of research becoming outdated or misaligned with evolving scientific priorities.
The 'COST NO FEE' structure, while potentially cost-effective, requires diligent oversight to ensure cost control and prevent overruns.
Basic research outcomes are inherently uncertain, making it challenging to guarantee a direct return on investment within the contract period.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition with 21 bids, indicating strong interest and a healthy market.
The sustained funding over a long period allows for in-depth, potentially groundbreaking research.
Focus on basic biomedical research aligns with NIH's mission to seek fundamental knowledge about life, health, and disease.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader scientific research and development sector, specifically focusing on basic biomedical research. The market for such research is characterized by academic institutions, non-profit organizations, and some private companies. Funding for basic research is often provided by government agencies like NIH, with significant annual outlays supporting a wide array of scientific inquiry. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the specialized nature of basic research and the variability in project scope and duration.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included specific small business set-asides. As a research grant awarded to a large academic institution, the primary focus is on scientific merit and institutional capacity rather than small business participation. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses are not explicitly detailed but could potentially arise if specialized services or equipment are required.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the awarding agency. Given the long duration and nature of basic research, oversight would likely involve regular progress reports, peer review of research findings, and adherence to ethical guidelines. Transparency is generally maintained through public dissemination of research results. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

National Institutes of Health Research Grants
Biomedical Research Funding
University Research Contracts
Basic Science Research Awards

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may lead to research misalignment.
Cost reimbursement contract requires diligent oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $26.8 million to UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN C. BIOMEDICAL (BASIC)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN C.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (National Institutes of Health).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-09-27. End: 2015-07-16.

What is the historical spending pattern for biomedical basic research grants awarded by NIH to large academic institutions?

NIH historically awards a significant portion of its budget to basic research, with a substantial amount directed towards large academic institutions like universities. These grants are often long-term, spanning multiple years to allow for in-depth scientific investigation. Spending patterns show a consistent commitment to fundamental science, although specific award amounts can vary widely based on the research scope, the institution's capabilities, and the number of competing proposals. The total annual budget for NIH is in the tens of billions of dollars, a significant portion of which funds basic research across various scientific disciplines, including biomedical sciences. Awards to individual institutions can range from hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of dollars annually, depending on the scale and complexity of the research programs supported.

How does the 'COST NO FEE' award type typically impact the overall cost-effectiveness for the government in research contracts?

The 'COST NO FEE' award type is designed to reimburse the contractor solely for their allowable costs incurred in performing the contract, without any additional profit margin. This structure can enhance cost-effectiveness for the government, particularly in research and development where outcomes are uncertain and the primary goal is to facilitate scientific inquiry rather than generate profit for the contractor. By removing the profit motive, the government aims to ensure that funds are primarily directed towards the research activities themselves. However, effective cost control and diligent oversight are crucial to prevent potential cost overruns or inefficient resource allocation by the contractor, as there is less financial incentive for the contractor to minimize expenses compared to a fixed-price or cost-plus-incentive-fee contract.

What are the potential risks associated with a 15-year contract duration for basic biomedical research?

A 15-year contract duration for basic biomedical research presents several potential risks. Firstly, scientific fields evolve rapidly; research priorities and methodologies that are cutting-edge at the outset may become outdated or superseded over such a long period. This could lead to the research becoming less relevant or impactful by its conclusion. Secondly, maintaining consistent funding and institutional commitment over such an extended timeframe can be challenging. Changes in agency priorities, budget fluctuations, or shifts in institutional leadership could impact the project's continuity. Thirdly, the long duration increases the risk of personnel turnover, potentially disrupting the research momentum. Finally, the extended period makes it harder to accurately forecast resource needs and potential challenges, requiring robust adaptive management strategies to ensure the project remains on track and aligned with its objectives.

How does the number of bids (21) in a full and open competition influence price discovery and potential savings for this contract?

A high number of bids, such as the 21 received in this full and open competition, generally has a positive impact on price discovery and potential savings for the government. With numerous entities vying for the contract, the competitive pressure encourages bidders to submit their most attractive proposals, both in terms of technical approach and cost. This broad participation allows the awarding agency to better benchmark the expected costs for the research services. A larger pool of bidders increases the likelihood that the government will receive offers close to the true market value of the services required. Consequently, this competitive environment can lead to more favorable pricing and potentially significant savings compared to a situation with limited competition where bidders may have more leverage to set higher prices.

What is the University of Minnesota's track record in securing and managing large federal research grants, particularly from NIH?

The University of Minnesota has a well-established track record of securing and managing significant federal research grants, including substantial funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). As a major research university, it consistently ranks among institutions receiving significant federal research and development funding. Its researchers are actively involved in a wide array of scientific disciplines, and the university has demonstrated capabilities in managing complex, multi-year projects. While specific details on all past grants are extensive, the university's continued success in competitive grant applications from agencies like NIH indicates a strong capacity for scientific innovation, project management, and responsible stewardship of federal funds. This history suggests a reliable partner for long-term research endeavors.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3935 UNIVERSITY WAY, NE, SEATTLE, WA, 98195

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,878,066

Exercised Options: $26,751,905

Current Obligation: $26,751,905

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Timeline