NASA's $23.5M Genesis Project R&D contract awarded to California Institute of Technology, a sole-source procurement

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,526,268 ($23.5M)

Contractor: California Institute of Technology

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2003-09-16

End Date: 2010-09-26

Contract Duration: 2,567 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.2K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 51

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E

Place of Performance

Location: PASADENA, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91125

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $23.5 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY for work described as: GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E Key points: 1. The contract focused on research and development in physical, engineering, and life sciences, indicating a specialized technical need. 2. Awarded as a sole-source procurement, suggesting unique capabilities or prior relationship with the contractor. 3. The contract duration of over 2500 days highlights a long-term research endeavor. 4. The 'COST PLUS AWARD FEE' contract type implies performance incentives tied to achieving specific project milestones. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates no specific provisions for small business participation. 6. The contract was awarded to a single entity, raising questions about the breadth of competitive pricing. 7. The project name 'GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E' suggests it is part of a larger, ongoing research initiative.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and specialized R&D focus. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to assess if the cost-plus award fee structure yielded optimal value for money. The significant duration suggests substantial resource allocation, but the specific outcomes and their cost-effectiveness relative to market alternatives are not readily apparent from the provided data. Further analysis would require understanding the project's specific technical goals and the justification for a sole-source award.

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. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or when there is a compelling justification for avoiding full and open competition. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no direct price competition, which can sometimes lead to higher costs for the government compared to a competitively awarded contract.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit opportunities for other qualified vendors to compete, potentially excluding more cost-effective solutions and reducing taxpayer value through lack of price discovery.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the scientific community and NASA, through advancements in physical, engineering, and life sciences research. The services delivered are advanced research and development, contributing to scientific knowledge and technological innovation. The geographic impact is primarily within California, where the contractor is located, but the scientific findings can have global implications. Workforce implications include employment for specialized researchers, scientists, and support staff at the California Institute of Technology.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Lack of competition may have resulted in suboptimal pricing.
  • Cost-plus award fee contracts can sometimes incentivize cost overruns if not carefully managed.
  • Sole-source justification requires rigorous review to ensure necessity and prevent potential contractor lock-in.

Positive Signals

  • Award to a reputable research institution like Caltech suggests high technical capability.
  • Long contract duration indicates a sustained commitment to a potentially significant research objective.
  • The 'award fee' component suggests a mechanism for incentivizing performance and achieving specific research outcomes.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. This sector is characterized by innovation, long project timelines, and often requires specialized expertise. Comparable spending in this area can vary widely depending on the specific scientific domain and the scale of the research. NASA's R&D spending is a significant portion of its budget, supporting exploration, technology development, and fundamental scientific inquiry.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for them. As a sole-source award to a large research institution, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal. However, the prime contractor may engage small businesses for specific support services, though this is not explicitly detailed in the provided information.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's program management and contracting officers. The 'COST PLUS AWARD FEE' structure implies performance monitoring against defined milestones to determine award fee payouts. Transparency would depend on NASA's reporting practices for R&D contracts and any public dissemination of research findings. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

  • NASA Research and Development Contracts
  • Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
  • Sole Source Procurements
  • Scientific Research Grants
  • Aerospace Technology Development

Risk Flags

  • Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
  • Potential for cost escalation in CPAF contracts if not managed.
  • Lack of transparency on specific R&D outcomes.

Tags

nasa, research-and-development, california, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, science-and-technology, long-term-project, academic-research, physical-sciences, engineering, life-sciences

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $23.5 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF 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 $23.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-16. End: 2010-09-26.

What specific scientific advancements or technological innovations resulted from the GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E?

The provided data does not detail the specific scientific advancements or technological innovations resulting from the GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E. As a research and development contract, its primary output would be new knowledge, methodologies, or prototypes within the physical, engineering, and life sciences. To ascertain the specific outcomes, one would need to consult NASA's project reports, scientific publications stemming from the project, or internal NASA assessments of the project's success against its stated objectives. The 'award fee' component suggests that performance metrics were established, and understanding these metrics would offer insight into the intended deliverables and the criteria for success.

Can the $23.5 million expenditure be benchmarked against similar R&D projects in the physical, engineering, and life sciences?

Benchmarking the $23.5 million expenditure for the GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E against similar R&D projects is challenging due to several factors. Firstly, the contract was sole-source, limiting direct comparison with competitively bid projects. Secondly, the specific sub-field within physical, engineering, and life sciences is not detailed, making it difficult to find directly comparable projects. R&D costs can vary immensely based on the complexity, novelty, duration, and required resources (personnel, equipment, facilities). While $23.5 million over approximately 7 years (2003-2010) represents a significant investment, its 'value for money' can only be assessed internally by NASA based on the project's unique goals and achievements, rather than external market comparisons.

What was the justification for awarding this contract as sole-source to the California Institute of Technology?

The justification for awarding the GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E as a sole-source contract to the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) is not provided in the data. Typically, sole-source awards are made when there is only one responsible source capable of providing the required service or product. This could be due to unique capabilities, proprietary technology, extensive prior research and development experience with the specific subject matter, or a critical need for continuity with previous work. NASA would have had to document and approve this justification, likely citing Caltech's specific expertise or unique facilities essential for the 'Genesis Project' to proceed without interruption or compromise.

How did the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type influence project management and contractor performance?

The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type for the GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E means that the contractor (Caltech) was reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a fee that consisted of a fixed base amount and an award amount. The award amount was determined based on the government's evaluation of the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. This structure incentivizes the contractor to perform well and achieve specific objectives, as higher performance leads to a higher fee. For project management, it requires NASA to establish clear performance metrics and conduct regular evaluations. It aims to balance cost reimbursement with performance incentives, encouraging efficiency and effectiveness in achieving the project's R&D goals.

What is the historical spending pattern for R&D contracts awarded to the California Institute of Technology by NASA?

The provided data only includes details for the 'GENESIS PROJECT: PHASE E' contract. It does not offer a historical overview of NASA's spending patterns with the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) for R&D contracts. To analyze historical spending, one would need access to broader federal procurement databases (like USASpending.gov) and filter for all contracts awarded by NASA to Caltech over a specific period, categorized under R&D or relevant NAICS codes (like 541710). This would reveal trends in contract values, types, durations, and the specific research areas funded, providing a more comprehensive picture of the relationship between NASA and Caltech.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesScientific Research and Development ServicesResearch and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTSpace R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 51

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4800 OAK GROVE DR, PASADENA, CA, 91109

Business Categories: Category Business, Government, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,720,317

Exercised Options: $24,720,317

Current Obligation: $23,526,268

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NAS703001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2003-09-16

Current End Date: 2010-09-26

Potential End Date: 2010-09-26 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2019-12-02

More Contracts from California Institute of Technology

View all California Institute of Technology federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending