NIH awarded $30.4M for physical science R&D to Premier Research, Inc. over 11 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,379,622 ($30.4M)

Contractor: Premier Research, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2003-09-30

End Date: 2014-08-15

Contract Duration: 3,972 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: R&D-PHYSICAL SCIENCE-A RES/EXPL DEV

Place of Performance

Location: PHILADELPHIA, PHILADELPHIA County, PENNSYLVANIA, 19103

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $30.4 million to PREMIER RESEARCH, INC. for work described as: R&D-PHYSICAL SCIENCE-A RES/EXPL DEV Key points: 1. Contract duration significantly exceeded typical R&D project timelines, raising questions about efficiency. 2. The contract's cost-plus-fixed-fee structure may incentivize cost escalation. 3. Limited competition could have impacted price discovery and value for money. 4. The contract was awarded under a broad R&D category, lacking specific performance metrics. 5. Premier Research, Inc. has a history of government contracts, but specific performance on this award requires deeper analysis. 6. The contract's value is moderate within the context of NIH's overall R&D spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $30.4 million over nearly 11 years averages to approximately $2.76 million per year. Benchmarking this against similar R&D contracts is challenging without more specific project details. However, the extended duration for a research and development project suggests potential inefficiencies or scope creep. The cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) pricing structure, while common for R&D, carries inherent risks of cost overruns if not meticulously managed.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. However, the data only specifies two bids were received. A low number of bids, even under full and open competition, can sometimes suggest a lack of robust market interest or specialized requirements that limited the bidder pool, potentially impacting price competitiveness.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers, a low bid count warrants scrutiny to ensure the government secured the best possible value and that the competition was truly meaningful.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely researchers and institutions within the physical sciences supported by NIH funding. The contract facilitated research and development activities, contributing to scientific advancement. The geographic impact is primarily centered in Pennsylvania, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include employment for scientists, researchers, and support staff at Premier Research, Inc.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Extended contract duration (nearly 11 years) for an R&D project may indicate scope creep or inefficiencies.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure can lead to higher costs if not tightly managed.
Low number of bids (2) in a full and open competition could suggest limited market engagement or specialized requirements.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, adhering to principles of broad market access.
Contractor has experience with government contracts, suggesting familiarity with compliance and reporting.
The contract supports critical R&D activities within the physical sciences.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences sector, a significant area of federal investment. NIH is a major funder of such research. The total value of $30.4 million over its lifespan is moderate for a multi-year R&D endeavor, but specific benchmarks depend heavily on the precise nature of the research conducted.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside criterion for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from set-aside requirements for this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve regular reporting requirements from Premier Research, Inc. to NIH, including progress reports and financial statements. Accountability is managed through adherence to the contract's terms and conditions, including the fixed fee and cost ceilings. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases, though specific project details may be proprietary. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

National Institutes of Health Research Grants
National Science Foundation Research Funding
Department of Defense Research and Development Contracts

Risk Flags

Extended contract duration
Cost-plus-fixed-fee pricing structure
Low number of bids received under full and open competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $30.4 million to PREMIER RESEARCH, INC.. R&D-PHYSICAL SCIENCE-A RES/EXPL DEV

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PREMIER RESEARCH, INC..

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 $30.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-30. End: 2014-08-15.

What specific research areas were covered under this contract, and how did they align with NIH's strategic priorities at the time?

The contract falls under the broad category of 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' (NAICS 541710). While the specific research areas are not detailed in the provided data, NIH's strategic priorities often encompass areas like biomedical engineering, materials science for medical applications, and fundamental physical sciences underpinning biological processes. Without further documentation, it's difficult to precisely map this contract's activities to specific NIH initiatives. However, R&D contracts of this nature typically aim to advance scientific knowledge and technological capabilities that could eventually lead to health benefits or improved medical treatments.

How does the $30.4 million total award compare to other R&D contracts awarded by NIH for similar research areas during the contract period?

Comparing the $30.4 million total award requires context regarding the contract's duration and scope. Awarded from 2003 to 2014 (nearly 11 years), the average annual value was approximately $2.76 million. NIH awards a vast range of R&D contracts, from small, targeted grants to large, multi-year programs. Contracts in the physical sciences can vary significantly in cost depending on the complexity, equipment needs, and personnel involved. While $30.4 million is a substantial sum, it is not exceptionally large for an 11-year R&D effort within a major federal agency like NIH, which manages billions in research funding annually. More specific comparisons would necessitate identifying contracts with identical or highly similar research objectives and durations.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones established for Premier Research, Inc. under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones for this contract. Typically, R&D contracts, especially those with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, would include defined milestones such as research progress reports, successful completion of experimental phases, development of prototypes, or publication of findings. The absence of this information in the summary data suggests that these details are likely contained within the full contract documentation. Effective oversight would rely on clearly defined and measurable KPIs to track progress and ensure the contractor is meeting expectations.

Given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, what mechanisms were in place to control costs and ensure value for money?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. To control costs and ensure value, NIH would have implemented several oversight mechanisms. These typically include rigorous review of incurred costs to ensure they are allowable, allocable, and reasonable according to federal acquisition regulations. Regular progress reviews, milestone tracking, and performance evaluations would also be crucial. Furthermore, the fixed fee itself provides a ceiling on the contractor's profit, incentivizing efficiency to complete the work within the estimated cost base. However, the inherent risk with CPFF is potential cost escalation if the government's oversight is not diligent.

What is Premier Research, Inc.'s track record with government contracts, particularly with NIH or similar research agencies?

Premier Research, Inc. has a history of receiving government contracts, as indicated by its presence in federal procurement databases. While the provided data doesn't detail their performance history on specific contracts, their ability to secure an 11-year, $30.4 million award suggests a level of established capability and past performance acceptable to the awarding agency. A deeper dive into contract databases like FPDS or SAM.gov would reveal the number and types of contracts they've held, their performance ratings (if available), and their experience with agencies like NIH or other research-focused organizations. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their track record.

How did the 'full and open competition' with only two bids received impact the final contract price and terms?

While 'full and open competition' theoretically maximizes the potential bidder pool, receiving only two bids suggests that the actual market engagement may have been limited for this specific requirement. This could occur if the research area was highly specialized, requiring unique expertise or facilities, or if potential competitors were deterred by contract terms or perceived risks. With only two bidders, the government has less leverage to negotiate aggressive pricing compared to a scenario with multiple competing offers. The final price and terms would be a result of negotiation between NIH and the two bidders, potentially leading to a less competitive outcome than if more firms had participated.

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: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › General Science and Technology R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 30 SOUTH 17TH. ST. 9 FLOOR, PHILADELPHIA, PA, 19103

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,158,412

Exercised Options: $31,140,501

Current Obligation: $30,379,622

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline