NASA's $13.18M contract for safety and mission assurance consulting services awarded to Mission Technology
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $13,182,900 ($13.2M)
Contractor: Mission Technology
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2020-07-01
End Date: 2025-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,917 days
Daily Burn Rate: $6.9K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE SAFETY AND MISSION ASSURANCE OFFICE
Place of Performance
Location: HAMPTON, HAMPTON CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23681
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $13.2 million to MISSION TECHNOLOGY for work described as: RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE SAFETY AND MISSION ASSURANCE OFFICE Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in specialized consulting for critical NASA operations. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are noted as 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES', suggesting a potentially complex procurement process. 3. The contract duration of approximately 5 years indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The primary contractor, Mission Technology, will provide services to the Safety and Mission Assurance Office. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541690 points to 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services', a broad but essential category for complex government functions. 6. The contract type is 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE', which can incentivize contractor efficiency while managing costs.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
Benchmarking the value of this contract requires detailed comparison to similar consulting services procured by NASA and other federal agencies. Given the specialized nature of safety and mission assurance for space exploration, the $13.18 million over nearly five years appears reasonable, assuming the scope of work is comprehensive and the contractor's expertise is highly specialized. The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' structure allows for cost control while ensuring the contractor is motivated to complete the work effectively.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources may have been excluded prior to the final award. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed here but could relate to specialized capabilities, prior performance, or other pre-qualification criteria. The level of competition, even with exclusions, is crucial for ensuring fair pricing and optimal value.
Taxpayer Impact: While the exact number of bidders is not specified, the 'exclusion of sources' clause suggests that the competition might have been narrower than a purely 'full and open' process, potentially impacting the final price achieved for taxpayers.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA's Safety and Mission Assurance Office, which will receive expert consulting to enhance operational safety and mission success. Services delivered will focus on risk management, ensuring the integrity and reliability of space missions. The geographic impact is primarily centered around NASA facilities and mission control centers, likely within Virginia where the contract is managed. Workforce implications may include the engagement of highly skilled consultants and analysts, potentially augmenting NASA's internal capabilities.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition process warrants further investigation to ensure no potentially capable and cost-effective vendors were unfairly barred.
- The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' contract type, while common, requires diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns and ensure the fixed fee remains appropriate for the work performed.
Positive Signals
- The award to Mission Technology suggests they possess the specialized expertise required for NASA's safety and mission assurance needs.
- The long contract duration indicates a stable, ongoing requirement for these critical services, providing continuity for NASA's safety protocols.
- The focus on 'RISK MANAGEMENT' directly addresses a core concern for high-stakes space missions.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the broader 'Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services' sector, a critical component of the federal contracting landscape. This sector supports a wide range of government functions, from defense and aerospace to environmental and infrastructure projects. The market for such specialized consulting is competitive, with firms often needing to demonstrate deep technical expertise and a proven track record. NASA's spending in this area is substantial, reflecting the complexity and high-risk nature of space exploration and research.
Small Business Impact
Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not explicitly provided in the data. However, given the specialized nature of safety and mission assurance consulting for NASA, it is possible that larger, specialized firms are primary awardees. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved in subcontracting opportunities or if specific set-aside goals were established for this contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and the Safety and Mission Assurance Office. Accountability measures are embedded within the 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' structure, requiring detailed reporting and justification of costs. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases and public reporting, though specific performance metrics and oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible. The Inspector General's office at NASA would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations if any irregularities were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Safety and Mission Assurance Programs
- Aerospace Engineering Consulting Services
- Federal Risk Management Contracts
- Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
Risk Flags
- Competition Exclusion
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee Oversight
Tags
nasa, consulting-services, risk-management, safety-and-mission-assurance, mission-technology, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, virginia, scientific-and-technical-consulting-services, federal-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $13.2 million to MISSION TECHNOLOGY. RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE SAFETY AND MISSION ASSURANCE OFFICE
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is MISSION TECHNOLOGY.
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 $13.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2020-07-01. End: 2025-09-30.
What specific risk management methodologies and tools will Mission Technology employ under this contract?
While the provided data does not detail the specific methodologies, contracts for 'RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE SAFETY AND MISSION ASSURANCE OFFICE' typically require the contractor to implement established frameworks such as Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Hazard Analysis, Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). Mission Technology would likely be expected to develop and maintain risk registers, conduct risk assessments for new projects and existing systems, and provide recommendations for risk mitigation strategies. The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' structure suggests that the scope of these methodologies and the level of detail in their application will be defined within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), with the fixed fee covering the agreed-upon level of effort and expertise in applying these techniques to NASA's unique safety and mission assurance challenges.
How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar consulting services procured by NASA or other federal agencies?
Direct comparison of the total contract value ($13.18M) without detailed scope of work and labor rates makes precise benchmarking difficult. However, the 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' (CPFF) structure is common for complex services where precise costs are hard to predict. For CPFF contracts, the 'cost' portion covers direct and indirect costs incurred by the contractor, while the 'fixed fee' represents the contractor's profit. The reasonableness of the fee is assessed against industry standards and the complexity of the services. Given the specialized nature of safety and mission assurance for NASA, and the contract duration of nearly five years, the overall value appears within a plausible range for such high-stakes consulting. Further analysis would require comparing the contractor's proposed labor rates, overhead, and fee against benchmarks for similar technical consulting services within the aerospace and defense sectors.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate Mission Technology's performance on this contract?
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a contract focused on 'RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE SAFETY AND MISSION ASSURANCE OFFICE' would likely revolve around the effectiveness of risk identification, assessment, and mitigation. Specific KPIs could include the timeliness and accuracy of risk assessments, the reduction in identified critical risks over the contract period, the successful implementation of recommended mitigation strategies, and adherence to NASA's safety standards and protocols. The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' structure implies that performance will be monitored against the agreed-upon scope and deliverables outlined in the contract's Statement of Work. NASA's contracting officer and technical representatives would track these KPIs, potentially through regular progress reports, reviews, and audits, to ensure Mission Technology is meeting its contractual obligations and contributing to enhanced safety and mission assurance.
What is the historical spending pattern for safety and mission assurance consulting services at NASA?
Historical spending on safety and mission assurance consulting services at NASA can be substantial, reflecting the agency's commitment to minimizing risks in its complex and high-stakes operations. While specific aggregate data for this category isn't provided, NASA consistently invests in technical consulting, systems engineering, and safety oversight. This includes contracts for independent assessments, risk analysis, program protection planning, and assurance reviews across various missions and projects. Spending in this area can fluctuate based on the number and complexity of ongoing missions, the development of new technologies, and evolving safety regulations. Analyzing past contract awards for similar services, including their values, durations, and awarded contractors, would provide a clearer picture of NASA's historical investment trends in this critical domain.
What is the track record of Mission Technology in providing similar consulting services to government agencies?
The provided data indicates Mission Technology is the awardee for this contract, suggesting they have a relevant track record. However, specific details about their past performance, client satisfaction, and experience with similar government contracts are not included. To assess their track record thoroughly, one would need to review their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), other federal contract awards, and any publicly available information on their project portfolio. A strong history of successfully delivering complex technical consulting, particularly in safety, risk management, and mission assurance for aerospace or defense clients, would be a positive indicator for their capability to fulfill NASA's requirements effectively under this new contract.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 9535 MIDWEST AVE STE 114, CLEVELAND, OH, 44125
Business Categories: Category Business, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, SBA Certified 8 a Joint Venture, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $13,897,653
Exercised Options: $13,897,653
Current Obligation: $13,182,900
Actual Outlays: $12,832,436
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80LARC20D0005
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2020-07-01
Current End Date: 2025-09-30
Potential End Date: 2025-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-09-30
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 →