NASA's $199M facilities support contract to CALL HENRY INC awarded under full and open competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $19,909,831 ($19.9M)
Contractor: Call Henry Inc
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2003-05-15
End Date: 2013-05-31
Contract Duration: 3,669 days
Daily Burn Rate: $5.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: FUNCING
Place of Performance
Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $19.9 million to CALL HENRY INC for work described as: FUNCING Key points: 1. The contract represents a significant investment in maintaining critical NASA facilities. 2. Analysis of value for money requires benchmarking against similar facilities support contracts. 3. Competition dynamics indicate a robust bidding process, potentially leading to favorable pricing. 4. Risk indicators may include contractor performance history and the complexity of services. 5. Performance context is essential to understand how the contractor met NASA's needs over the contract's lifespan. 6. This contract positions CALL HENRY INC as a key provider of essential services to a major federal agency.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The total value of $199,098,310 over approximately 10 years suggests an average annual spend of roughly $20 million. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale facilities support contracts for federal agencies of NASA's size and scope is crucial. Without specific per-unit cost data or detailed service breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the duration and scale indicate a substantial commitment, and the pricing would need to be competitive with industry standards for comparable services.
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 bids. With 6 bidders participating, this suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant facilities support services contract. A higher number of bidders generally correlates with better price discovery and potentially more innovative solutions, as contractors vie to win the award.
Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, full and open competition with multiple bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing, ensuring that federal funds are used efficiently. It reduces the risk of overpayment and encourages contractors to offer their best value propositions.
Public Impact
NASA facilities across its operational sites benefit from consistent and reliable support services. The contract ensures the upkeep and functionality of critical infrastructure necessary for space exploration and research. The geographic impact is likely widespread, covering multiple NASA installations where facilities support is required. Workforce implications include direct and indirect employment opportunities for individuals in facilities management, maintenance, and related trades.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs without adequate change order management.
- Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure maintenance could pose operational risks if performance falters.
- Ensuring consistent service quality across all potentially diverse NASA facilities requires robust oversight.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
- Long-term contract duration provides stability and predictability for service delivery.
- The scale of the contract indicates the contractor's capacity to handle complex facilities management requirements.
Sector Analysis
Facilities Support Services is a broad category encompassing a wide range of maintenance, repair, and operational activities for buildings and grounds. This sector is critical for government operations, ensuring that federal agencies can function effectively. The market size is substantial, with significant annual spending across federal, state, and local governments. This contract fits within the larger trend of agencies outsourcing non-core functions to specialized service providers to focus on their primary missions.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically mandated for small businesses through a set-aside program. However, the prime contractor, CALL HENRY INC, may still engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill portions of the contract requirements, depending on their own business practices and the nature of the services needed.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), likely through contracting officers and technical representatives. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Buildings Fund
- Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
- Other Agency Facilities Support Services
Risk Flags
- Long-term contract duration may increase risk if contractor performance degrades over time.
- Complexity of facilities support across potentially diverse NASA sites requires robust management and oversight.
- Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure could pose continuity risks.
Tags
nasa, facilities-support-services, call-henry-inc, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, information-technology, ohio, federal-agency, service-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $19.9 million to CALL HENRY INC. FUNCING
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CALL HENRY 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 $19.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-05-15. End: 2013-05-31.
What is the historical spending pattern for facilities support services at NASA?
Historical spending on facilities support services at NASA, like other large federal agencies, likely fluctuates based on infrastructure needs, modernization projects, and budget allocations. While specific historical data for this exact contract is limited to its award and duration, NASA's overall budget includes significant allocations for maintaining its vast array of research centers, launch sites, and administrative facilities. Analyzing past contracts for similar services, including their value, duration, and competition levels, would provide context. Trends might show an increasing reliance on outsourcing these functions to specialized firms, driven by a desire for efficiency and expertise, alongside efforts to modernize aging infrastructure. Understanding these patterns helps in assessing whether the $199 million awarded to CALL HENRY INC aligns with historical investment levels or represents a shift in strategy.
How does the per-unit cost of services under this contract compare to industry benchmarks?
Determining the precise per-unit cost for services under this $199 million NASA contract is challenging without detailed breakdowns of the services provided (e.g., cost per square foot maintained, cost per maintenance task, labor rates). Facilities support services encompass a wide array of activities, from janitorial and groundskeeping to complex HVAC and electrical system maintenance. To benchmark effectively, one would need to compare specific service line items against industry reports from organizations like IFMA (International Facility Management Association) or BOMA (Building Owners and Managers Association), which provide cost data based on building type, size, and geographic location. Given the 'full and open competition' and six bidders, it's reasonable to infer that the pricing was competitive at the time of award. However, a definitive comparison requires granular data not publicly available in the summary.
What is CALL HENRY INC's track record with federal contracts, particularly with NASA?
CALL HENRY INC's track record with federal contracts, especially with NASA, is a critical factor in assessing the performance risk of this $199 million award. Information from federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) would detail their past awards, including contract types, values, agencies served, and performance history ratings (if available). A history of successful contract completions, positive performance reviews, and minimal disputes would indicate a lower risk. Conversely, a pattern of contract terminations, poor performance ratings, or significant disputes would raise concerns. For a large, long-term contract like this facilities support services award, NASA would have likely reviewed CALL HENRY INC's past performance extensively during the source selection process to ensure capability and reliability.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract?
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a facilities support services contract of this magnitude typically focus on service delivery, operational efficiency, safety, and cost control. Examples might include response times for maintenance requests, preventative maintenance completion rates, energy efficiency targets, waste reduction metrics, safety incident rates, and customer satisfaction scores from NASA facility users. The contract documents would explicitly define these KPIs, along with the methodologies for measurement and the acceptable performance thresholds. Failure to meet these KPIs could result in contractual remedies, such as service level credits or even termination. NASA's oversight team would be responsible for monitoring these KPIs throughout the contract's duration.
How does the scope of services in this contract compare to similar facilities management contracts awarded by other federal agencies?
The scope of services for this $199 million NASA contract likely includes a comprehensive suite of facilities management functions, such as operations and maintenance (O&M) of buildings and grounds, custodial services, minor repairs, space management, potentially energy management, and safety compliance. Comparing this scope to similar contracts awarded by agencies like the General Services Administration (GSA), Department of Defense (DoD), or Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) requires analyzing the specific service requirements outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW). While core O&M functions are common, NASA's unique requirements related to research labs, launch facilities, or specialized testing environments might necessitate a broader or more technically specialized scope than typical office building management contracts. The 'Facilities Support Services' NAICS code (561210) covers a wide range, so the specifics of the SOW are crucial for a direct comparison.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Contractor Details
Address: 308 PINE ST, TITUSVILLE, FL, 08
Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $114,247,268
Exercised Options: $19,469,075
Current Obligation: $19,909,831
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-05-15
Current End Date: 2013-05-31
Potential End Date: 2013-05-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2012-10-24
More Contracts from Call Henry Inc
- Federal Contract — $72.8M (Department of Defense)
- This Contract FA4610-18-C-0005 Replaces FA4610-12-C-0004 — $72.6M (Department of Defense)
- "NEW Award" Launch Operations Support Contract (losc) - Range Support Services - FY12 Through FY17 — $54.7M (Department of Defense)
- Facilities Maintenance and Support Services — $32.0M (Environmental Protection Agency)
- NEW Task Under Call Henry — $27.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
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 →