NASA awards Yulista Solutions $38.6M for aircraft support, with contract duration extending to February 2027

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $38,607,403 ($38.6M)

Contractor: Yulista Solutions, LLC

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2023-03-08

End Date: 2027-02-28

Contract Duration: 1,453 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: CHARLES CONTRACT TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR AIRCRAFT AT LARC. INCLUDES AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE, FLIGHT OPERATIONS, ENGINEERING, LIFECYCLE, QUALITY, SAFETY, AND OTHER RELATED SUPPORT FOR A VARIETY OF AIRFRAMES, ENGINES, APPLIANCES, AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35808

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $38.6 million to YULISTA SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: CHARLES CONTRACT TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR AIRCRAFT AT LARC. INCLUDES AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE, FLIGHT OPERATIONS, ENGINEERING, LIFECYCLE, QUALITY, SAFETY, AND OTHER RELATED SUPPORT FOR A VARIETY OF AIRFRAMES, ENGINES, APPLIANCES, AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT Key points: 1. The contract's value of $38.6 million over its period of performance suggests a moderate investment in specialized aircraft support services. 2. Full and open competition after exclusion of sources indicates a deliberate procurement strategy, potentially balancing broad market access with specific source considerations. 3. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces potential for cost overruns, necessitating robust oversight to manage contractor incentives. 4. The contract's focus on comprehensive aircraft support, including maintenance, engineering, and safety, addresses critical operational needs for NASA's aviation assets. 5. Performance is situated in Alabama, aligning with regional aerospace industry strengths and potentially leveraging local expertise. 6. The absence of small business set-asides or prime subcontracting requirements warrants scrutiny regarding broader economic impact and opportunities for smaller firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $38.6 million for aircraft support services appears to be within a reasonable range for comprehensive, long-term support contracts of this nature. However, without specific benchmarks for the exact services provided (e.g., per flight hour, per maintenance action), a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The CPFF structure means that the government bears the risk of cost overruns, which could increase the final expenditure beyond initial projections. Benchmarking against similar NASA or DoD contracts for aircraft lifecycle support would provide a clearer picture of cost-effectiveness.

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.' This procurement method suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on predefined criteria or prior justifications. The number of bidders is not specified, but this approach aims to ensure fair opportunity while potentially streamlining the process by focusing on a qualified pool. The level of competition, even if narrowed, should theoretically drive competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition, even with exclusions, is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to solicit the best value from a wide range of potential providers, fostering price discovery and potentially leading to more cost-effective solutions.

Public Impact

NASA's aviation operations and research initiatives benefit directly from the sustained availability and readiness of its aircraft fleet. The contract ensures the continued operation, maintenance, and engineering support for various airframes, engines, and related equipment. Services are primarily delivered within Alabama, supporting the state's significant aerospace and defense industrial base. The contract supports a workforce skilled in aircraft maintenance, engineering, quality assurance, and safety protocols within the aerospace sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

• The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can incentivize contractors to increase costs to maximize profit, requiring diligent oversight.
• The 'after exclusion of sources' aspect of the competition warrants understanding the rationale behind exclusions to ensure fairness and prevent potential market manipulation.
• Lack of specific performance metrics or detailed service level agreements in the provided data makes it difficult to assess performance outcomes definitively.
• No explicit small business subcontracting goals are mentioned, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller businesses in this contract's value chain.

Positive Signals

• The contract covers a comprehensive range of critical aircraft support functions, ensuring operational readiness and safety.
• The duration of the contract (nearly four years) provides stability and predictability for NASA's aircraft support needs.
• The award to Yulista Solutions, LLC, contributes to the economic activity within the aerospace sector in Alabama.
• The use of full and open competition, even with exclusions, suggests an effort to achieve competitive pricing and access a qualified vendor pool.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on aviation support services. The market for such services is substantial, driven by government and commercial entities requiring specialized maintenance, repair, and operational support for complex aircraft. NASA's spending in this area is crucial for its aeronautical research and space exploration missions. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale aircraft sustainment contracts within government agencies like the Department of Defense, which often involve similar scope and complexity.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false) and does not explicitly mention prime subcontracting requirements (sb: false). This suggests that the primary award went to Yulista Solutions, LLC, without specific mandates for involving small businesses as subcontractors. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific contract may be limited unless Yulista voluntarily engages small businesses. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to fully assess the impact.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officer and administrative contracting officer. Given the CPFF structure, rigorous monitoring of costs, performance, and compliance is essential to ensure value for money and prevent contractor overspending. Transparency is facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms, though the extent of public disclosure for specific cost details may vary. The Inspector General's office for NASA would have jurisdiction to investigate any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

• NASA Aircraft Maintenance and Sustainment Programs
• DoD Aviation Support Contracts
• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Support Services
• Aerospace Research and Development Contracts

Risk Flags

• Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent cost oversight.
• Potential for limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources' rationale.
• Lack of explicit small business subcontracting requirements.
• Performance data and specific KPIs not publicly detailed.

Tags

nasa, aircraft-support, yulista-solutions, alabama, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, aviation-services, aerospace, contract-award, federal-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $38.6 million to YULISTA SOLUTIONS, LLC. CHARLES CONTRACT TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR AIRCRAFT AT LARC. INCLUDES AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE, FLIGHT OPERATIONS, ENGINEERING, LIFECYCLE, QUALITY, SAFETY, AND OTHER RELATED SUPPORT FOR A VARIETY OF AIRFRAMES, ENGINES, APPLIANCES, AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is YULISTA SOLUTIONS, LLC.

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 $38.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-03-08. End: 2027-02-28.

What is Yulista Solutions, LLC's track record with NASA and other federal agencies for similar aircraft support services?

Yulista Solutions, LLC has a history of performing contracts related to aviation support, maintenance, and logistics for various government agencies, including NASA and the Department of Defense. Their past performance often involves providing services for aircraft sustainment, component repair, and operational support. Analyzing their performance history, including any past performance evaluations, contract modifications, or disputes, is crucial for assessing their capability and reliability in fulfilling the current contract's requirements. Specific details on their prior NASA contracts, particularly those involving similar scope and complexity, would offer the most relevant context for evaluating their suitability for this award.

How does the $38.6 million total award compare to similar aircraft support contracts awarded by NASA or other agencies in recent years?

The $38.6 million total award for comprehensive aircraft support services over approximately four years represents a significant, but not unprecedented, investment. To benchmark this value, one would compare it against contracts for similar scope, duration, and service complexity. For instance, contracts involving depot-level maintenance, extensive engineering support, and lifecycle management for comparable aircraft fleets within the DoD or other NASA centers could serve as benchmarks. Factors such as the specific types of airframes supported, the intensity of operations, and the required technical expertise influence cost. Without detailed service breakdowns, a precise comparison is difficult, but the award appears aligned with substantial, long-term aviation sustainment requirements.

What are the primary risks associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this aircraft support services award?

The primary risk associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type is the potential for the contractor to increase costs to maximize their profit, as the fee is fixed regardless of the final cost. This structure places the cost risk on the government. Effective management requires stringent oversight of contractor expenditures, detailed cost accounting, and regular audits to ensure that costs are reasonable and allocable. NASA must actively monitor the contractor's performance and cost-reporting to prevent unnecessary spending and ensure that the fixed fee remains a fair incentive rather than an opportunity for inflated profits. Robust performance metrics and clear deliverables are essential to mitigate these risks.

What specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are likely being used to evaluate Yulista Solutions' performance under this contract?

While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, typical performance metrics for aircraft support contracts include aircraft availability rates, mission capable rates, turnaround times for maintenance and repairs, adherence to safety protocols, quality of work (e.g., defect rates), and timely completion of engineering tasks. For a contract encompassing flight operations, metrics related to flight hours, safety incident rates, and adherence to flight schedules would also be critical. NASA would likely establish specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) KPIs within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) to ensure Yulista meets the required standards for aircraft readiness, safety, and operational efficiency.

How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement method potentially impact pricing and vendor selection compared to a standard full and open competition?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method implies that while the competition was initially broad, certain potential offerors were excluded based on specific criteria or justifications, possibly related to past performance, technical capabilities, or security requirements. This can lead to a more focused competition among a qualified subset of vendors. While it aims to ensure a high caliber of bidders, the exclusion of sources could potentially limit the breadth of competition, which in a standard full and open scenario might drive prices lower. The impact on pricing depends heavily on the number and competitiveness of the remaining eligible bidders and the validity of the exclusion rationale.

What is the historical spending pattern for aircraft support services by NASA, and how does this $38.6 million award fit within that trend?

NASA's historical spending on aircraft support services can fluctuate based on fleet size, operational tempo, research priorities, and the lifecycle of its aviation assets. The agency consistently invests in maintaining and operating its diverse aircraft fleet, which supports aeronautical research, space mission support, and technology development. A $38.6 million award over nearly four years suggests a sustained, significant commitment to a particular set of aircraft or support functions. To understand its place in the trend, one would analyze NASA's budget allocations and contract awards for similar services over the past 5-10 years. This award appears to represent a substantial, ongoing requirement rather than a one-off expenditure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Support Activities for Air Transportation › Other Support Activities for Air Transportation

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 80JSC022R0014

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 8600 ADVANCED GTWY SW, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35808

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $52,378,503

Exercised Options: $42,926,623

Current Obligation: $38,607,403

Actual Outlays: $31,505,326

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 42

Total Subaward Amount: $31,795,943

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 80JSC023DA017

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2023-03-08

Current End Date: 2027-02-28

Potential End Date: 2030-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2026-03-23

More Contracts from Yulista Solutions, LLC

• THE Purpose of Charles IS to Provide Support for Aircraft AT JSC, Based AT Ellington Field in Houston, and AT EL Paso, Texas — $143.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• Comprehensive Aircraft Readiness, Lifecycle, Engineering, and Support (charles). Contractor to Provide Aircraft Maintenance, Logistics, Engineering, Project Management, Operational Support, Airborne Research and Development — $18.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• Aircraft Maintenance, Inflight and Ground Support, Equipment Maintenance, Flight Following, and Administrative Support on TWO (2) Boeing 737-400 Combi Aircrafts and ONE (1) Boeing 737-700 Flex-Combi Aircrafts for Office of Secure Transportation (OST) — $16.7M (Department of Energy)
• DI ITS AT IT Program Management Support — $3.6M (Department of Justice)

View all Yulista Solutions, LLC federal contracts →

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 →

Explore Related Government Spending