NASA's $14.5M JPL Instrument Incubator contract awarded to Caltech for R&D

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,524,335 ($14.5M)

Contractor: California Institute of Technology

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2003-09-15

End Date: 2007-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,234 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: ROUND2, JPL INSTRU INCUB

Place of Performance

Location: PASADENA, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91125

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $14.5 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY for work described as: ROUND2, JPL INSTRU INCUB Key points: 1. Contract focused on research and development for physical, engineering, and life sciences. 2. Awarded to a single entity, raising questions about competition and potential cost efficiencies. 3. Long duration suggests a significant, ongoing need for the services provided. 4. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) can incentivize performance but requires careful oversight. 5. Geographic concentration in California for this significant federal investment. 6. The specific NAICS code indicates a focus on scientific research and development services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging due to its specialized R&D nature and sole-source award. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure allows for flexibility but necessitates robust performance metrics to ensure value. Without comparable contracts or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult. The duration and total value suggest a substantial investment in innovation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis to the California Institute of Technology. This approach bypasses the standard competitive bidding process, which typically involves multiple vendors vying for the contract. While sole-source awards can be justified for unique capabilities or existing relationships, they limit price discovery and may not always yield the most cost-effective outcome for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the benefits of competitive pricing are forgone. It also reduces opportunities for other qualified entities to secure federal funding.

Public Impact

Benefits the California Institute of Technology by providing significant research funding. Supports advancements in physical, engineering, and life sciences through instrument development. Geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include employment for researchers, engineers, and support staff at Caltech.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Lack of competition may lead to suboptimal pricing.
  • Cost Plus Award Fee contracts require diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns.
  • Sole-source nature limits opportunities for other research institutions.

Positive Signals

  • Award to a reputable research institution (Caltech) suggests a high likelihood of technical success.
  • Focus on R&D aligns with NASA's mission to advance space exploration and science.
  • Long contract duration indicates a sustained need and potential for significant innovation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The market for such specialized R&D services is often characterized by a limited number of highly qualified institutions and firms. NASA's spending in this area is critical for developing next-generation technologies for space missions. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other federal agencies funding similar scientific research, such as NSF or NIH, though direct comparisons are difficult due to the unique nature of space-related instrument development.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, nor is there information suggesting significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The award to a large research institution like Caltech typically means the primary work is performed in-house. This limits the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Award Fee contract would primarily be managed by NASA contracting officers and technical monitors. They are responsible for ensuring performance meets award fee criteria and that costs are reasonable and allocable. Transparency is generally limited for sole-source R&D contracts, with details often proprietary. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

  • NASA Research and Development Contracts
  • JPL Research Programs
  • Instrument Development Contracts
  • Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

  • Sole-source award limits competition.
  • Cost Plus Award Fee requires diligent oversight.
  • Long contract duration increases exposure to potential cost changes.

Tags

research-and-development, nasa, california, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, instrument-development, aerospace, scientific-research, delivery-order

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $14.5 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. ROUND2, JPL INSTRU INCUB

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 $14.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-15. End: 2007-01-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for the JPL Instrument Incubator program?

The provided data covers a single contract from 2003 to 2007 with a value of approximately $14.5 million. To understand the historical spending pattern, one would need to examine contract awards for the 'JPL Instrument Incubator' or similar programs over a longer period. This would involve searching federal procurement databases for prior and subsequent contracts, noting their values, durations, awardees, and contract types. Analyzing this broader dataset would reveal trends in program funding, the typical number of awards, and whether the program has consistently relied on sole-source awards or utilized competitive processes.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure typically impact contractor performance and cost?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract structure is designed to incentivize contractor performance by allowing for a base cost reimbursement plus an additional award fee based on achieving specific performance objectives. This can lead to higher quality work and innovation as contractors are motivated to exceed minimum requirements. However, CPAF contracts also require robust government oversight to define clear performance metrics and to objectively evaluate the contractor's achievements. Without stringent monitoring, there's a risk of costs escalating beyond initial estimates, as the 'cost plus' element means the government covers allowable expenses. The award fee itself can also be a significant portion of the total contract value, making performance evaluation critical.

What are the specific research areas funded under this contract?

The contract is categorized under 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences' (NAICS code 541710). While the specific 'JPL Instrument Incubator' program name suggests a focus on developing new instruments, the broader NAICS code indicates that the research could encompass a wide array of scientific disciplines. This might include areas like advanced materials, robotics, sensor technology, propulsion systems, astrophysics instrumentation, or even biological research relevant to space exploration. Detailed project descriptions within the contract documents would provide a more granular understanding of the exact research and instrument development activities undertaken.

What is the significance of awarding R&D contracts to institutions like Caltech?

Awarding Research and Development (R&D) contracts to institutions like the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) is significant because these organizations are often at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological innovation. Caltech, with its strong ties to NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), possesses specialized expertise, state-of-the-art facilities, and a deep pool of scientific talent. Such partnerships allow government agencies like NASA to leverage external capabilities for complex, cutting-edge research that might be difficult or less efficient to conduct in-house. These collaborations are crucial for advancing scientific knowledge and developing the technologies needed to achieve ambitious mission goals.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source R&D contract of this duration?

A sole-source R&D contract of significant duration, like this one (over 3 years), carries several potential risks. Firstly, the lack of competition means the government may not be achieving the best possible price, as there's no market pressure to drive down costs. Secondly, relying on a single contractor, even a highly capable one like Caltech, can create vendor lock-in and reduce flexibility if research directions need to pivot significantly. There's also a risk that the contractor's internal priorities might shift, potentially impacting the focus or pace of the contracted work. Finally, without competitive benchmarking, it can be harder to objectively assess if the contractor is performing at peak efficiency and innovation levels throughout the contract's life.

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: 1

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: $17,212,490

Exercised Options: $17,212,490

Current Obligation: $14,524,335

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NAS703001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2003-09-15

Current End Date: 2007-01-31

Potential End Date: 2007-01-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2020-01-06

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