NASA's $101K Lunar Surface Power Modeling contract awarded to The Aerospace Corporation for R&D
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $101,391 ($101.4K)
Contractor: THE Aerospace Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2026-04-15
End Date: 2026-09-30
Contract Duration: 168 days
Daily Burn Rate: $604/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: GLENN RESEARCH CENTER (GRC) LUNAR SURFACE POWER MODELING (SPM) PMAD MODELING ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION
Place of Performance
Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $101,390.53 to THE AEROSPACE CORPORATION for work described as: GLENN RESEARCH CENTER (GRC) LUNAR SURFACE POWER MODELING (SPM) PMAD MODELING ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical research and development for lunar surface power systems. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market exploration. 3. Short performance period suggests a focused, task-specific objective. 4. The Aerospace Corporation's expertise in space systems likely influenced the selection. 5. Performance period falls within the current fiscal year, indicating timely project initiation. 6. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) allows for flexibility but requires careful oversight.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $101,390.53 is relatively small for a federal R&D contract. Without comparable contracts for lunar surface power modeling, it is difficult to benchmark the value. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed diligently, as it reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a fixed fee. However, for research and development where the scope may evolve, CPFF can provide necessary flexibility.
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 or when the need is urgent and only one source can meet it. The lack of competition means that pricing and innovative solutions may not have been fully explored through a competitive bidding process, potentially impacting the overall value for money.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can limit opportunities for other businesses and may not always result in the most cost-effective outcome for taxpayers, as the government does not benefit from the price discovery inherent in a competitive environment.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's exploration and technology development goals for lunar missions. Delivers critical analysis and modeling for future lunar power systems. Geographic impact is primarily within NASA's research centers, with potential for broader application in space exploration. Workforce implications are likely concentrated within specialized R&D personnel at the contractor and NASA.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential for innovation from a wider market.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires robust oversight to manage costs effectively.
- Short performance period may indicate a narrowly defined scope, potentially limiting broader applicability or future development.
Positive Signals
- Award to The Aerospace Corporation leverages established expertise in space systems and R&D.
- Focus on lunar surface power modeling directly supports NASA's Artemis program and future lunar objectives.
- Contract addresses a critical technological need for sustained lunar presence.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical sciences and engineering related to space exploration. The market for specialized space R&D is often characterized by a limited number of highly qualified contractors. NASA's spending in this area is crucial for advancing technological capabilities for missions beyond Earth orbit. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the niche nature of lunar power modeling.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside. Given the specialized nature of the R&D required for lunar surface power modeling, it is likely that the contractor selected possesses unique expertise. There is no explicit indication of subcontracting opportunities for small businesses within the provided data.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract will be managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Accountability measures will likely involve regular progress reports, technical reviews, and financial audits to ensure costs are allowable and the fixed fee is earned. Transparency is facilitated through federal contract databases, though detailed project specifics may be limited.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Lunar Exploration Programs
- Space Technology Research Grants
- Advanced Power Systems Research
- Aerospace Engineering Services
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
- CPFF contract type requires diligent cost oversight.
- Short performance period may limit scope and long-term impact.
Tags
research-and-development, nasa, national-aeronautics-and-space-administration, ohio, delivery-order, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee, space-technology, lunar-exploration, power-systems
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $101,390.53 to THE AEROSPACE CORPORATION. GLENN RESEARCH CENTER (GRC) LUNAR SURFACE POWER MODELING (SPM) PMAD MODELING ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is THE AEROSPACE CORPORATION.
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 $101,390.53.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2026-04-15. End: 2026-09-30.
What is the specific expertise of The Aerospace Corporation in lunar surface power modeling?
The Aerospace Corporation is a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) that provides research, development, and systems engineering and integration support to the U.S. government, primarily for space systems. Their expertise spans a wide range of aerospace disciplines, including power systems, propulsion, materials science, and mission analysis. For lunar surface power modeling, this likely includes experience with solar power generation in varying lunar conditions (illumination, dust, temperature), energy storage solutions, power distribution, and thermal management. Their role as an FFRDC often involves tackling complex, long-term research challenges that require deep technical knowledge and objective analysis, making them well-suited for specialized modeling tasks like this one.
How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type compare to other R&D contract types in terms of value for money?
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used for research and development where the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, allowing for flexibility as the project evolves. The contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred and receives a predetermined fixed fee. While this offers flexibility, it can be less cost-effective than fixed-price contracts if costs escalate significantly, as the government bears the risk of cost overruns. However, compared to Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF), CPFF provides a more predictable fee for the contractor. For R&D, the value for money is often assessed not just on cost but also on the quality of the research outcomes and the achievement of technical objectives, where CPFF can be appropriate if managed with strong oversight.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for this type of R&D contract?
The primary risk of a sole-source award is the lack of competition, which can lead to several issues. Firstly, without competing bids, the government may not secure the most competitive pricing, potentially overpaying for the services. Secondly, it limits the opportunity for other qualified contractors to showcase their capabilities and propose innovative solutions that might be more efficient or effective. This can stifle market competition and innovation in the long run. Thirdly, there's a risk that the selected contractor may not be the absolute best fit or may not feel the same pressure to perform at peak efficiency as they would in a competitive environment. For specialized R&D, the justification for sole-source often rests on unique capabilities, but this must be rigorously assessed to ensure it's truly the only viable option.
What are the implications of the short performance period (approx. 5 months) for the lunar surface power modeling project?
A short performance period of approximately five months suggests that this contract is likely focused on a specific, well-defined task or a preliminary phase of a larger project. This could mean the modeling analysis is intended to address a particular question, validate a specific concept, or provide initial data for subsequent, larger efforts. The brevity implies a need for rapid results and efficient execution. It also means that the contract may not encompass long-term development, extensive validation, or the integration of findings into a fully operational system. The outcomes will likely be a set of models, analyses, and potentially recommendations rather than a complete solution.
How does this contract align with NASA's broader lunar exploration objectives, such as the Artemis program?
This contract directly aligns with NASA's broader lunar exploration objectives, particularly the Artemis program, which aims to establish a sustainable human presence on the Moon. Reliable and efficient power systems are fundamental to any long-term lunar base, supporting habitats, scientific instruments, rovers, and life support systems. Lunar surface power modeling is a critical early step in designing, developing, and validating these essential power infrastructures. Understanding how power systems will perform under various lunar conditions (e.g., long lunar nights, dust accumulation on solar panels, extreme temperatures) is crucial for mission success and astronaut safety. This R&D effort contributes vital data and analytical tools needed to make informed decisions about future power system architectures for lunar missions.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 2310 EAST EL SEGUNDO BLVD, EL SEGUNDO, CA, 90245
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $101,391
Exercised Options: $101,391
Current Obligation: $101,391
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80GSFC19D0011
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2026-04-15
Current End Date: 2026-09-30
Potential End Date: 2026-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-04-07
More Contracts from THE Aerospace Corporation
- FY19 Engineering Services — $7.9B (Department of Defense)
- Aerospace Ffrdc Contract From 1 OCT 2013 to 30 Sept 2018 — $4.3B (Department of Defense)
- Aerospace Ffrdc Contract — $4.0B (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $3.3B (Department of Defense)
- Nasa-Wide Specialized Engineering, Evaluation and Test Services (nseets) to Provide On/Off-Site Project Independent Multidisciplinary Engineering Services, Testing, Consulting, Contractor-On-Site Monitoring, and Evaluation of Project And/Or Programs — $166.3M (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 →