NASA awards $2.4M task order for occupational health services, extending existing BPA
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $2,397,056 ($2.4M)
Contractor: GSE Inc
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2024-10-01
End Date: 2025-09-30
Contract Duration: 364 days
Daily Burn Rate: $6.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: NASA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT II (NOHC II) NEW LEGACY TASK ORDER. ESTABLISH FISCAL YEAR 25 INCREMENTALLY FUNDED TASK ORDER FOR NASA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT II (NOHC II).
Place of Performance
Location: TRINITY, MORGAN County, ALABAMA, 35673
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $2.4 million to GSE INC for work described as: NASA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT II (NOHC II) NEW LEGACY TASK ORDER. ESTABLISH FISCAL YEAR 25 INCREMENTALLY FUNDED TASK ORDER FOR NASA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT II (NOHC II). Key points: 1. Task order represents a modest increment to a larger blanket purchase agreement. 2. Services are for occupational health, a critical function for agency personnel. 3. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process. 4. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide budget certainty. 5. Performance period is one year, aligning with fiscal year planning. 6. Contractor, GSE Inc., is likely performing under an established BPA. 7. Geographic focus is Alabama, where NASA facilities are located.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The task order value of $2.4 million is relatively small in the context of federal contracting. Benchmarking against similar occupational health contracts would require access to more detailed service descriptions and pricing structures. However, the firm-fixed-price nature suggests a degree of cost control. The value appears reasonable for a one-year service period for a specific geographic region.
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 offers. This suggests a healthy competitive environment for this specific task order. The number of bidders is not specified, but the competition type implies that NASA sought the best value through a broad solicitation.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to better pricing and service quality, preventing potential overcharges associated with less competitive award methods.
Public Impact
NASA employees in Alabama will receive occupational health services. Services aim to ensure a safe and healthy work environment for personnel. The contract supports the operational readiness of NASA's facilities in Alabama. Potential indirect impact on the local healthcare services sector in Alabama.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly within the BPA framework.
- Reliance on a single contractor for critical health services requires robust performance monitoring.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.
- One-year performance period allows for regular reassessment of needs.
Sector Analysis
Occupational health services are a niche but essential part of the broader professional services sector within federal contracting. This contract fits within the government's need to provide a safe working environment for its employees, particularly in specialized fields like aerospace. Spending in this area is generally consistent year-over-year, driven by regulatory requirements and employee well-being initiatives.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). While the BPA itself might have provisions for small business participation through subcontracting, this specific task order does not appear to be a direct small business award. Further analysis of the BPA's subcontracting plan would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this task order would fall under NASA's existing contract management and administration processes for the NOHC II BPA. Accountability is ensured through the firm-fixed-price structure and the defined performance period. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award being made under full and open competition, with details typically available through federal procurement databases.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Occupational Health Services
- Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs)
- Federal Occupational Health Services
- Professional and Technical Services
Risk Flags
- Performance Risk: Ensuring consistent quality and availability of occupational health services.
- Contract Management Risk: Adequately overseeing task order execution under the BPA.
Tags
nasa, occupational-health, blanket-purchase-agreement, task-order, gse-inc, alabama, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, professional-services, healthcare-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $2.4 million to GSE INC. NASA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT II (NOHC II) NEW LEGACY TASK ORDER. ESTABLISH FISCAL YEAR 25 INCREMENTALLY FUNDED TASK ORDER FOR NASA OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT II (NOHC II).
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GSE 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 $2.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2024-10-01. End: 2025-09-30.
What is the historical spending pattern for the NASA Occupational Health Blanket Purchase Agreement II (NOHC II)?
The provided data only details a single task order for FY25 valued at $2.4 million. To understand the historical spending pattern of the NOHC II BPA, one would need to examine all task orders issued under this agreement since its inception. This would involve analyzing total obligated amounts, the number and value of task orders awarded annually, and the types of services procured. Without this broader dataset, it's impossible to establish a trend or benchmark this specific task order against the BPA's overall performance. Past spending could reveal if this $2.4 million represents a typical annual expenditure or a deviation.
How does the pricing of this task order compare to similar occupational health contracts awarded by NASA or other federal agencies?
A direct price comparison is challenging without detailed service level agreements (SLAs) and unit costs for both this task order and comparable contracts. The $2.4 million value for a one-year period for occupational health services in Alabama provides a high-level benchmark. To perform a robust comparison, one would need to identify contracts with similar scopes of work, geographic coverage, and service populations. Factors like the complexity of medical services, required certifications, and specific health screenings offered would influence pricing. Benchmarking tools and databases that aggregate federal contract data could be used to find similar awards and analyze their cost structures relative to this task order.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the contractor's performance under this task order?
The specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this task order are not detailed in the provided data. However, typical KPIs for occupational health services contracts often include metrics related to appointment wait times, availability of medical staff, response times for medical emergencies, adherence to health and safety regulations, patient satisfaction scores, and the accuracy and timeliness of medical record keeping. NASA would likely have established specific performance standards within the NOHC II BPA, and this task order would be evaluated against those benchmarks. Performance would also be assessed based on the contractor's ability to meet the defined scope of services and maintain compliance.
What is the track record of GSE Inc. in performing similar occupational health services for the federal government?
GSE Inc. is the awardee for this task order under the NOHC II BPA. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving occupational health services. This includes reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), identifying previous contracts of similar size and scope, and looking for any instances of contract disputes, terminations, or performance issues. A positive track record would indicate reliability and capability, while negative indicators would raise concerns about potential risks associated with this award.
What are the potential risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?
Potential risks for this contract include service disruptions if the contractor faces staffing shortages or operational issues, potential cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price model is not adequately managed, and risks related to the quality and timeliness of health services provided. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust contract surveillance by NASA personnel, clear performance standards and SLAs within the BPA, regular performance reviews with the contractor, and contingency planning. The firm-fixed-price nature itself acts as a cost mitigation tool. Ensuring the contractor maintains adequate staffing and adheres to all regulatory requirements are also key risk mitigation efforts.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Remediation and Other Waste Management Services › Remediation Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 3795 GORDON TERRY PKWY, TRINITY, AL, 35673
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $2,397,056
Exercised Options: $2,397,056
Current Obligation: $2,397,056
Actual Outlays: $2,397,056
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80KSC020A0011
IDV Type: BPA
Timeline
Start Date: 2024-10-01
Current End Date: 2025-09-30
Potential End Date: 2025-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-04-07
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 →