NASA awards $61.4M contract for computer systems design services to Lockheed Martin Corporation
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $61,398,274 ($61.4M)
Contractor: Lockheed Martin Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2000-09-15
End Date: 2010-10-28
Contract Duration: 3,695 days
Daily Burn Rate: $16.6K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: NOT REPORTED
Sector: IT
Place of Performance
Location: ROCKVILLE, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20850
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $61.4 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting potential cost savings from competition. 2. Long contract duration of nearly 10 years suggests a need for sustained services. 3. The award was made by NASA's own agency, indicating internal service provision. 4. No small business set-aside was applied, potentially impacting small business participation. 5. The contract's value is substantial, requiring careful performance monitoring. 6. The specific nature of computer systems design services can be complex and require specialized expertise.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $61.4 million over nearly 10 years averages to approximately $6.14 million per year. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the lack of competition suggests that pricing may not have been subjected to market pressures that typically drive down costs. Benchmarking against similar large-scale computer systems design contracts would be necessary for a more robust evaluation.
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 circumstances do not permit a competitive process. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery and innovation that can arise from a bidding process.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding, as the contractor did not have to compete on price or offer the most cost-effective solution.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA, which receives essential computer systems design services. The services delivered likely support NASA's complex operational and research needs. The geographic impact is centered in Maryland, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include employment for skilled IT professionals at Lockheed Martin.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential taxpayer savings.
- Long contract duration may not reflect evolving technological needs or market efficiencies.
- Lack of small business set-aside could reduce opportunities for smaller, innovative firms.
Positive Signals
- Award to a large, established contractor like Lockheed Martin suggests a focus on reliability and proven capability.
- The sustained nature of the contract indicates a critical and ongoing need for these services within NASA.
- The contract's value implies a significant scope of work, potentially encompassing complex and vital systems.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) sector, specifically focusing on computer systems design services. This is a critical area for government agencies, supporting everything from administrative functions to complex scientific research and operations. The market for IT services is vast and competitive, but sole-source awards can bypass typical market dynamics. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large IT service contracts awarded by federal agencies for similar system design and integration work.
Small Business Impact
The absence of a small business set-aside for this contract means that opportunities for small businesses to directly participate as the prime contractor were not prioritized. While Lockheed Martin, as a large business, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, the primary award did not guarantee set-aside benefits. This could limit the direct impact on the small business IT ecosystem, which often thrives on prime contract awards and the associated growth opportunities.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers, who are responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and approving payments. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Accountability measures would include performance reviews, milestone tracking, and potential penalties for non-performance. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA IT Services Contracts
- Computer Systems Design and Related Services
- Large-Scale IT Infrastructure Support
- Federal IT Procurement
- Sole-Source IT Awards
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award may indicate limited competition.
- Long contract duration could lead to technology obsolescence if not managed.
- Lack of small business set-aside limits opportunities for smaller firms.
Tags
it, nasa, maryland, sole-source, large-contract, computer-systems-design, lockheed-martin-corporation, information-technology, service-contract, federal-spending
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $61.4 million to LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LOCKHEED MARTIN 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 $61.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2000-09-15. End: 2010-10-28.
What specific computer systems design services were procured under this contract?
The contract, NAICS code 541512, specifies 'Computer Systems Design Services.' This broad category typically encompasses a range of activities including analyzing user needs, designing and developing custom software and hardware solutions, integrating different computer systems, and providing IT consulting. For NASA, these services could range from designing mission-critical command and control systems for spacecraft to developing large-scale data management and analysis platforms for scientific research. The exact scope would be detailed in the contract's statement of work, which is not publicly available in this data snippet. However, given the contractor and agency, it's likely related to complex aerospace and scientific computing infrastructure.
How does the $61.4 million value compare to similar IT services contracts awarded by NASA?
Comparing the $61.4 million value requires context on the contract's duration and scope. This contract spans nearly 10 years (3695 days), averaging approximately $16.6 million annually. NASA procures a wide array of IT services, with contract values varying significantly based on complexity, duration, and specific requirements. Large-scale system design and integration projects can easily reach tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Without access to NASA's specific procurement history for comparable sole-source computer systems design services over similar timeframes, a precise benchmark is challenging. However, the value is substantial, indicating a significant, long-term IT support requirement.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude?
The primary risk of a sole-source award is the lack of competitive pressure, which can lead to higher prices than might be achieved through a competitive process. This reduces the government's ability to secure the best possible value for taxpayer dollars. Additionally, sole-source contracts can sometimes indicate a lack of market research or an over-reliance on a single vendor, potentially stifling innovation from other market participants. For NASA, risks could include vendor lock-in, where switching providers becomes prohibitively expensive or complex, and a potential decrease in vendor responsiveness if competition is not a factor.
What is Lockheed Martin Corporation's track record with NASA for similar services?
Lockheed Martin Corporation is a major defense contractor with extensive experience supporting NASA on numerous complex projects, including space exploration, satellite development, and IT infrastructure. Their track record with NASA is generally characterized by large-scale, high-technology endeavors. While specific performance details for this particular contract are not provided, Lockheed Martin's long-standing relationship with NASA and its significant presence in the aerospace and defense IT sector suggest a capacity to handle demanding technical requirements. However, past performance on other contracts does not guarantee future success or optimal value on this specific sole-source award.
How has NASA's spending on computer systems design services evolved over time?
NASA's spending on computer systems design services has likely evolved significantly over time, mirroring advancements in technology and the increasing complexity of space missions and scientific research. Historically, early space programs relied on in-house design capabilities or smaller, specialized firms. As technology matured and projects grew in scale (e.g., the Space Shuttle, ISS, Mars rovers, James Webb Space Telescope), NASA increasingly relied on large, integrated contracts with major aerospace and IT firms like Lockheed Martin. Spending patterns would reflect shifts towards digital transformation, cloud computing, big data analytics, and cybersecurity, requiring sophisticated systems design. The trend is generally towards higher spending on advanced IT services to support increasingly data-intensive and technologically demanding missions.
What are the implications of the contract's start and end dates for long-term IT planning?
The contract's start date of September 15, 2000, and end date of October 28, 2010, indicate a nearly decade-long engagement. This long duration suggests that the computer systems design services were considered critical and stable requirements for NASA during that period. For long-term IT planning, such extended contracts can provide stability and ensure continuity of essential services. However, they also pose a risk of technological obsolescence if not managed proactively. NASA would need robust contract management to ensure the systems designed remained relevant and adaptable to evolving technological landscapes and mission needs throughout the contract's life. It also implies that significant planning and resource allocation were committed for an extended period.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: NOT REPORTED (NO)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)
Address: 700 N FREDERICK AVE LOC B, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Federally Funded Research and Development Corp, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NAS598145
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2000-09-15
Current End Date: 2010-10-28
Potential End Date: 2010-10-28 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2010-10-28
More Contracts from Lockheed Martin Corporation
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Department of Defense)
- THE Purpose of This Modification IS to Award F-35A Lrip 15 Usaf Aircraft* Long Lead Funding — $30.1B (Department of Defense)
- THE Purpose of This Contract IS to Award Long Lead Funding for F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C Aircraft for U.S. Services, Non-Dod Partners, and FMS Customers — $24.5B (Department of Defense)
- Lrip 11 AAC — $12.3B (Department of Defense)
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 →