Stanford University's $131M contract for NASA's Gamma Ray Telescope operations shows strong performance signals

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $131,260,088 ($131.3M)

Contractor: THE Leland Stanford Junior University

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2000-05-03

End Date: 2027-03-01

Contract Duration: 9,798 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 51

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: GAMMA RAY LARGE AREA SPACE TELESCOPE (GLAST). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPORTING NASA REVIEWS&DIRECTED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, OBSERVATION PLANNING, MISSION SCHEDULING, SATELLITE OPERATIONS, SCIENCE DATA PROCESSING SUPPORT, SPACECRAFT HEALTH/SAFETY/PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS, INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE SUPPORT ANALYSIS, FLIGHT/GROUND SYSTEM&SOFTWARE, AND ANOMALY RESOLUTION&ANALYSIS.

Place of Performance

Location: STANFORD, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94305

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $131.3 million to THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY for work described as: GAMMA RAY LARGE AREA SPACE TELESCOPE (GLAST). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPORTING NASA REVIEWS&DIRECTED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, OBSERVATION PLANNING, MISSION SCHEDULING, SATELLITE OPERATIONS, SCIENCE DATA PROCESSING SUPPORT, SPACECRAFT HEALTH/SAFETY/PERFORMANCE ANAL… Key points: 1. Contract value of $131.3 million over its duration indicates significant investment in space-based research. 2. The contract spans nearly 28 years, suggesting long-term commitment and stable operational needs. 3. Full and open competition was utilized, implying a robust bidding process. 4. The contractor, Stanford University, has a strong academic and research background relevant to the mission. 5. The contract type (Cost No Fee) suggests a focus on achieving mission objectives rather than profit maximization. 6. The presence of 51 modifications indicates ongoing adjustments and evolving requirements throughout the contract's life. 7. The contract's primary focus is on research and development, aligning with NASA's scientific exploration goals.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $131.3 million over almost 28 years suggests a substantial but potentially reasonable investment for a long-term, complex scientific mission like the Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST). Benchmarking against similar large-scale, multi-year space science missions would be necessary for a definitive value-for-money assessment. However, the Cost No Fee (CNF) contract type, while unusual for a prime contractor, often indicates a focus on mission success and research integrity, potentially leading to better value if the contractor is highly motivated by scientific outcomes rather than profit. The significant number of modifications (51) warrants scrutiny to ensure they reflect necessary project evolution rather than scope creep or inefficiencies.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. This approach generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. The fact that a definitive contract was awarded suggests a thorough evaluation of proposals. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the 'full and open' designation implies multiple interested parties participated.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is generally favorable for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for competitive pricing and ensures that the government receives the best value by considering a wide range of qualified offerors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the scientific community and the public, who gain access to data and insights from the Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope. The contract supports critical scientific research and development in astrophysics, expanding our understanding of the universe. Services delivered include mission operations, data processing, and engineering analysis, ensuring the telescope's continued functionality and scientific output. The geographic impact is global, as the data collected by the telescope is of international scientific interest. Workforce implications include employment for scientists, engineers, technicians, and support staff at Stanford University and potentially NASA facilities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

• The long duration of the contract (nearly 28 years) increases the risk of cost overruns due to unforeseen technical challenges or inflation.
• The 'Cost No Fee' (CNF) contract type, while potentially beneficial for mission focus, can sometimes lead to less contractor incentive for cost control if not carefully managed.
• The high number of contract modifications (51) could indicate potential issues with initial scope definition, planning, or execution, requiring close monitoring.
• Reliance on a single academic institution for such a critical, long-term mission component could pose a risk if institutional priorities shift or key personnel depart.

Positive Signals

• The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that likely yielded a qualified and reasonably priced offer.
• Stanford University's established reputation in research and development provides a strong foundation for fulfilling the contract's scientific and technical requirements.
• The Cost No Fee structure, if managed effectively, can align the contractor's goals with NASA's mission objectives, prioritizing scientific discovery.
• The extensive duration implies a stable, long-term partnership, allowing for deep expertise development and consistent operational support for the telescope.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences sector, specifically focusing on astrophysics and space science. The market for such specialized scientific support services is typically dominated by academic institutions and highly specialized research organizations. The contract's value of $131.3 million over its extended period is significant, reflecting the high cost associated with developing, launching, and operating advanced space-based scientific instruments. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other large NASA missions or similar international space agency projects requiring long-term operational and scientific support.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve small business set-asides, as indicated by the 'ss' (small business set-aside) field being false. Given the specialized nature of supporting a large space telescope mission, the prime contract is likely awarded to a large institution like Stanford University. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses, which would typically be detailed in a subcontracting plan if required for this type of award. The focus is on a large research institution, suggesting limited direct impact on the broader small business ecosystem for this specific prime contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is primarily managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost No Fee contract, NASA would closely monitor expenditures and performance to ensure mission objectives are met. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract's performance requirements and reporting obligations. Transparency is facilitated through NASA's public reporting of contract awards and, potentially, through scientific publications resulting from the telescope's data. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

• NASA Space Science Missions
• Astrophysics Research Programs
• Satellite Operations and Maintenance
• Scientific Data Processing
• Advanced Technology Development

Risk Flags

• Long contract duration increases risk exposure.
• Cost No Fee structure requires heightened oversight for cost control.
• High number of modifications warrants review for scope creep or planning issues.

Tags

nasa, stanford-university, astrophysics, space-telescope, research-and-development, definitive-contract, cost-no-fee, full-and-open-competition, california, long-term-contract, science-data-processing, satellite-operations

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $131.3 million to THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY. GAMMA RAY LARGE AREA SPACE TELESCOPE (GLAST). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPORTING NASA REVIEWS&DIRECTED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS, OBSERVATION PLANNING, MISSION SCHEDULING, SATELLITE OPERATIONS, SCIENCE DATA PROCESSING SUPPORT, SPACECRAFT HEALTH/SAFETY/PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS, INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE SUPPORT ANALYSIS, FLIGHT/GROUND SYSTEM&SOFTWARE, AND ANOMALY RESOLUTION&ANALYSIS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY.

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 $131.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-05-03. End: 2027-03-01.

What is the historical spending trend for the Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST) contract with Stanford University?

The provided data indicates a total contract value of $131,260,088, with a start date of May 3, 2000, and an estimated completion date of March 1, 2027. This spans approximately 27 years. While the total value is given, specific annual or periodic spending trends are not detailed in this data snippet. However, the long duration and substantial total value suggest consistent, significant annual outlays over the contract's life to support ongoing operations, data analysis, and necessary engineering support for the GLAST mission. The presence of 51 modifications implies that funding allocations may have been adjusted over time to accommodate evolving mission needs or unforeseen circumstances.

How does the cost of this contract compare to similar large-scale space telescope projects?

Direct cost comparisons are challenging without specific details on the scope and duration of 'similar' projects. However, a $131.3 million contract spread over nearly 28 years for the operational and scientific support of a major space telescope like GLAST appears to be on the lower end compared to the total lifecycle costs of some other flagship space science missions (e.g., Hubble, James Webb Space Telescope), which can run into billions of dollars for development, launch, and extended operations. The 'Cost No Fee' structure also differentiates it, as many large contracts include significant profit margins. Stanford's role as a research institution potentially leveraging existing infrastructure and focusing on scientific return rather than profit could contribute to a more cost-effective arrangement for this specific support function.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate Stanford University's performance under this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or specific metrics used to evaluate Stanford University's performance. However, based on the contract description, performance would likely be assessed against objectives related to: 1) Successful satellite operations and mission scheduling; 2) Timely and accurate science data processing; 3) Maintaining spacecraft health, safety, and performance; 4) Effective instrument performance support analysis; 5) Successful flight/ground system and software maintenance; and 6) Efficient anomaly resolution and analysis. NASA reviews and directed engineering analyses are also mentioned, implying qualitative and quantitative assessments of these support functions.

What is the track record of The Leland Stanford Junior University (Stanford University) as a contractor for NASA or similar agencies?

Stanford University has a long and distinguished track record in scientific research and development, particularly in fields relevant to space science and astrophysics. As a leading research university, it frequently collaborates with government agencies like NASA on various projects, often through grants and contracts. While this specific contract for GLAST operations is substantial, Stanford's broader history involves numerous successful research endeavors, publications, and contributions to scientific knowledge. Their expertise in physics, engineering, and computer science makes them a highly credible and experienced entity for supporting complex scientific missions. NASA's continued engagement with Stanford for this long-term project suggests a positive past performance.

Are there any identified risks associated with the 'Cost No Fee' (CNF) contract type for this mission?

The 'Cost No Fee' (CNF) contract type, while potentially aligning the contractor's focus with mission success and scientific objectives, carries specific risks. A primary concern is the potential lack of contractor incentive for rigorous cost control, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs without an additional profit margin. This could lead to less scrutiny on expenditures compared to a fixed-price or cost-plus-award-fee contract. NASA's oversight becomes even more critical to ensure that costs remain reasonable and necessary. Another risk is ensuring the contractor maintains sufficient motivation and resources for the long duration of the contract without the financial upside typically associated with profit. Careful monitoring of expenditures and performance is essential to mitigate these risks.

What is the significance of the 51 contract modifications for this GLAST support contract?

The 51 modifications to this contract, spanning its long duration, suggest a dynamic project environment. These modifications could represent a range of changes, including adjustments to the scope of work, technical requirements, schedule updates, or funding allocations. While some modifications are normal for long-term, complex projects like space telescope operations, a high number can sometimes indicate initial planning deficiencies, evolving scientific objectives, unforeseen technical challenges, or scope creep. Each modification would have been reviewed and approved by NASA, implying a rationale behind them. Analyzing the nature of these modifications would provide deeper insight into the contract's evolution and potential areas of concern or successful adaptation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 51

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Leland Stanford Junior University

Address: 651 SERRA ST, STANFORD, CA, 94305

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $132,603,830

Exercised Options: $132,603,830

Current Obligation: $131,260,088

Actual Outlays: $11,588,825

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 2000-05-03

Current End Date: 2027-03-01

Potential End Date: 2027-03-01 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2026-03-05

More Contracts from THE Leland Stanford Junior University

• Operation and Maintenance Linear Accellerator — $14.5B (Department of Energy)
• Solar Dynamics Observatory Project Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager Investigation (HMI) Phase B/C/D/E the Contractor Shall Provide Personnel, Materials, Equipment, Facilities and Resources Necessary for Design, Analysis, Development, Fabrication, Assembly, Integration, Testing, Calibration, Qualification and Delivery of a Flight Instrument for Spacecraft Integration. During Spacecraft Integration Activities, the Contractor Shall Support Instrument Installation and Integration, Integrated Spacecraft Testing and Flight Qualification, Launch Processing and Launch. Following Launch, the Contractor Shall Provide the Necessary Engineering and Science Resources to Perform Initial On-Orbit Checkout and Characterization of the Instrument and Shall Conduct Science Operations for the Remaining Duration of the Mission. the Principal Hardware Deliverables of This Effort ARE the Flight Hardware and Software Constituting the Flight Instrument Package and the Necessary Science Processing and Science Operations Ground Systems and Software Required to Analyze, Process, Distribute and Archive the Science Measurements Performed by the Instrument — $181.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• Gravity Probe B Science Mission Interiam Contract — $68.6M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• Pronto Study - Research in Securing OUR National Internet Infrastructure Using Measurement, Control, and Verification for Closed-Loop Control of Networks — $30.1M (Department of Defense)
• Base Period (2 Years) — $26.9M (Department of Defense)

View all THE Leland Stanford Junior University 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