NASA awards $3.2M for energy improvements at facilities, with Lead Builders Inc. as prime contractor
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $3,222,804 ($3.2M)
Contractor: Lead Builders Inc
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2022-09-22
End Date: 2026-04-02
Contract Duration: 1,288 days
Daily Burn Rate: $2.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: ENERGY IMPROVEMENT, N213 AND N239
Place of Performance
Location: MOFFETT FIELD, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94035
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $3.2 million to LEAD BUILDERS INC for work described as: ENERGY IMPROVEMENT, N213 AND N239 Key points: 1. Contract focuses on energy efficiency upgrades for buildings N213 and N239. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and manage financial risk. 4. Performance period extends over 1288 days, indicating a long-term project. 5. Prime contractor, Lead Builders Inc., has a track record with federal agencies. 6. Geographic focus on California for the project execution.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $3.2 million for energy improvements appears reasonable for a project of this scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar energy efficiency contracts for federal facilities would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure helps mitigate cost overruns, but the ultimate value will depend on the successful implementation and achieved energy savings.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the initial solicitation may have had some exclusions, the final award was made through a broad competitive process. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of technical solutions.
Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in a more favorable price than a sole-source or limited competition scenario. It ensures that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by selecting the most cost-effective and technically sound proposal.
Public Impact
Benefits federal agencies by improving energy efficiency and reducing operational costs. Delivers infrastructure upgrades to specific NASA facilities (Buildings N213 and N239). Geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the facilities are located. Workforce implications include potential job creation for construction and skilled trades in the region.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for scope creep if unforeseen issues arise during construction.
- Dependence on contractor's ability to deliver promised energy savings.
- Risk of delays impacting project timeline and operational continuity.
Positive Signals
- Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
- Long performance period allows for thorough execution and monitoring.
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive selection process.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically focusing on energy efficiency upgrades. The market for such services is substantial, driven by government mandates and private sector initiatives to reduce energy consumption and carbon footprints. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar facility upgrades can vary widely based on building size, complexity, and specific technologies implemented.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have a small business subcontracting requirement noted. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight will likely be managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to meet specified performance standards. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases, though detailed project-specific oversight reports may not be publicly available.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Building Energy Efficiency Programs
- NASA Facilities Management Contracts
- Energy Conservation Measures
- Construction and Renovation Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if scope changes
- Risk of project delays impacting operational schedules
- Uncertainty of achieving projected energy savings
Tags
energy-efficiency, construction, nasa, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, california, commercial-buildings, institutional-buildings, infrastructure-upgrade, lead-builders-inc
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $3.2 million to LEAD BUILDERS INC. ENERGY IMPROVEMENT, N213 AND N239
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LEAD BUILDERS 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 $3.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2022-09-22. End: 2026-04-02.
What is the track record of Lead Builders Inc. with federal contracts, particularly in energy efficiency projects?
Lead Builders Inc. has a history of performing work for federal agencies. While specific details on their track record in energy efficiency projects require deeper analysis of past performance data, their selection for this NASA contract suggests they meet the agency's requirements. A review of their past federal contract awards, including performance ratings and any past performance issues, would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and expertise in executing similar projects. Examining their portfolio of completed energy improvement projects would also be crucial to assess their capabilities and success rates in delivering energy savings.
How does the awarded price of $3.2 million compare to similar energy improvement projects at federal facilities?
The $3.2 million award for energy improvements at NASA facilities N213 and N239 needs to be benchmarked against comparable projects to assess its value. Factors influencing cost include the size and condition of the buildings, the scope of upgrades (e.g., HVAC, lighting, insulation), and the specific technologies employed. Without detailed project specifications and cost breakdowns, a direct comparison is difficult. However, for large-scale energy retrofits on institutional buildings, this figure could represent a reasonable investment, especially considering the long-term operational savings expected from improved energy efficiency. Further analysis would involve comparing cost per square foot or cost per unit of energy saved against industry standards and similar government contracts.
What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?
Key risks include potential cost overruns if the scope of work expands beyond initial estimates, delays in project completion impacting operational schedules, and the possibility that the projected energy savings may not be fully realized. The firm fixed-price contract structure is a primary mitigation strategy, placing the financial risk of cost overruns on the contractor. The extended performance period allows for phased implementation and monitoring, potentially mitigating schedule risks. NASA's oversight and quality assurance processes are crucial for ensuring the project meets specifications and achieves the intended energy efficiency goals. Performance bonds and liquidated damages clauses, if included, would further mitigate risks related to contractor default or delays.
How effective are NASA's current energy efficiency initiatives, and does this contract align with broader agency goals?
This contract directly supports NASA's broader goals of improving energy efficiency and sustainability across its facilities. Federal agencies are mandated to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, and projects like this are essential for meeting those targets. The effectiveness of NASA's initiatives can be gauged by tracking overall energy usage trends across its portfolio and the successful completion of such upgrade projects. The specific impact of this contract will depend on the quantifiable energy savings achieved post-implementation, which NASA will likely monitor through its energy management systems. Alignment with agency goals is evident through the focus on infrastructure modernization and operational cost reduction.
What are the historical spending patterns for energy improvement contracts at NASA, and how does this award fit within that trend?
Analyzing NASA's historical spending on energy improvement contracts would reveal trends in investment in facility modernization and energy efficiency. This $3.2 million award represents a specific investment in two buildings. Understanding the frequency and average value of similar contracts over the past several years would provide context. If NASA has consistently awarded contracts in this range for building upgrades, it suggests a steady commitment to facility maintenance and efficiency. Conversely, a significant deviation from historical spending could indicate a new strategic focus or a response to specific funding opportunities or mandates. This contract appears to be a standard component of ongoing facility management and capital improvement efforts.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Lead Builders, Inc.
Address: 2060 D AVE DE LOS ARBOLES U 116, THOUSAND OAKS, CA, 91362
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $3,222,804
Exercised Options: $3,222,804
Current Obligation: $3,222,804
Actual Outlays: $2,887,371
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80AFRC19D0009
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2022-09-22
Current End Date: 2026-04-02
Potential End Date: 2026-04-02 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-02
More Contracts from Lead Builders Inc
- THE Contractor Shall Provide ALL Plant, Labor, Transportation, Materials, Tools, Equipment, Appliances, and Supervision Necessary for the Repair of the Primary Aircraft Maintenance Hangar (building 801) AT Channel Islands AIR Guard Station, CA — $32.3M (Department of Defense)
- COF Substation 1 — $12.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Renovate Aerospace Ground Equipment (AGE) Facility Construction — $12.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Chiller Replacement N269 — $4.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Replace Perimeter Security Fence — $2.8M (National Aeronautics and Space 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 →