NASA's $22.17M contract with Caltech for plant systems R&D shows a lack of competition and high cost

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,173,853 ($22.2M)

Contractor: California Institute of Technology

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2003-09-30

End Date: 2012-09-30

Contract Duration: 3,288 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 51

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: SMD R&A PLNT SYS FY04-08

Place of Performance

Location: PASADENA, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91125

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $22.2 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY for work described as: SMD R&A PLNT SYS FY04-08 Key points: 1. The contract's cost-plus award fee structure may incentivize higher spending. 2. A single source award suggests limited market research or unique capabilities. 3. The contract duration of over 9 years raises questions about long-term planning and adaptability. 4. Performance context is limited due to the nature of R&D, making direct comparisons difficult. 5. This contract falls within the R&D sector, specifically focusing on physical sciences. 6. The lack of competition could lead to suboptimal pricing for taxpayers. 7. The contract's value is substantial for a single-source R&D award.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this R&D contract is challenging due to its specialized nature and lack of competition. The cost-plus award fee (CPAF) pricing structure, while common for R&D, can lead to costs exceeding initial estimates if not carefully managed. Without comparable sole-source contracts for similar plant systems R&D, it's difficult to definitively assess if the $22.17 million represents a fair price. However, the extended duration and lack of competitive pressure inherently increase the risk of overpayment.

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 indicates that NASA likely identified the California Institute of Technology as the only entity capable of performing the required research and development for these specific plant systems. The absence of multiple bidders means there was no price competition to drive down costs or encourage innovative solutions from a wider market.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition means taxpayers did not benefit from a potentially lower price that could have been achieved through a competitive bidding process. This also limits the government's ability to explore alternative approaches or technologies that might have been offered by other vendors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is NASA, which receives specialized research and development services for plant systems. The services delivered are focused on advancing scientific understanding and technological capabilities in a niche area. The geographic impact is primarily within California, where the California Institute of Technology is located. Workforce implications include specialized scientific and research roles at the contractor's institution.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Sole-source award limits price discovery and potential cost savings.
  • Cost-plus award fee structure can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
  • Extended contract duration of over 9 years may indicate a lack of agile planning or evolving requirements.
  • Lack of transparency in performance metrics due to the R&D nature of the work.

Positive Signals

  • Award to a reputable research institution (Caltech) suggests access to high-quality expertise.
  • Focus on R&D indicates investment in future technological advancements.
  • NASA's continued investment in this area may signal strategic importance.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically within scientific research services. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541710, 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences,' encompasses this type of work. The market for specialized R&D can be highly concentrated, with a few key institutions possessing unique expertise. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish for such niche, sole-source R&D efforts, but the overall federal spending on R&D is substantial, with agencies like NASA prioritizing scientific advancement.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have any small business set-aside provisions, nor is there information suggesting significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. As a sole-source award to a large research institution, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal. The focus is on specialized research capabilities rather than broad service delivery where small businesses typically play a larger role.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's program management and contracting officers. Given the sole-source nature and R&D focus, oversight would likely concentrate on technical progress, adherence to research milestones, and financial management of the cost-plus award fee structure. Transparency may be limited due to the proprietary nature of research findings, but NASA's internal audit and Inspector General offices would have jurisdiction for financial and performance reviews.

Related Government Programs

  • NASA Research and Development Contracts
  • Space Science Research
  • Life Support Systems R&D
  • Advanced Technology Development

Risk Flags

  • Sole-source award may indicate lack of market research or unique contractor capability.
  • Cost-plus award fee structure carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
  • Long contract duration (over 9 years) may lead to outdated technology or scope creep.
  • Lack of competition limits price discovery and potential taxpayer savings.

Tags

research-and-development, nasa, california, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, long-term-contract, scientific-research, plant-systems, federal-spending, aerospace

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $22.2 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. SMD R&A PLNT SYS FY04-08

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 $22.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-30. End: 2012-09-30.

What specific plant systems is this contract focused on, and why were they deemed critical for NASA's mission?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the 'plant systems' being researched. However, given NASA's context, these could relate to life support systems for long-duration space missions (e.g., growing food, recycling air and water), environmental control systems for spacecraft or habitats, or potentially biological research related to plant growth in space environments. The criticality would stem from enabling human presence beyond Earth's atmosphere, reducing reliance on resupply missions, and supporting astronaut health and well-being. Further details would require accessing the contract's statement of work.

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

Sole-source awards are typically justified when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the agency's needs. For a highly specialized R&D contract like this, NASA likely determined that Caltech possesses unique expertise, facilities, intellectual property, or personnel essential for the specific plant systems research. This could be due to prior work, established research programs, or unique scientific breakthroughs. The justification would need to be formally documented by NASA, outlining why other potential sources were not considered viable or capable of fulfilling the requirement.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure influence contractor behavior and potential costs for this R&D contract?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows the contractor (Caltech) to recover all allowable costs incurred, plus a base fee and an additional award fee. The award fee is determined by NASA based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. This structure incentivizes the contractor to perform well to earn the award fee, but it also means that costs can exceed initial estimates. For R&D, where outcomes are uncertain, CPAF provides flexibility. However, it requires robust oversight from NASA to ensure costs remain reasonable and that the award fee criteria are objective and aligned with mission goals, preventing potential cost overruns driven by less stringent cost controls.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract duration of over 9 years for R&D?

A contract duration of over 9 years (3288 days) for R&D presents several risks. Firstly, technology and scientific understanding can evolve rapidly, meaning the initial research objectives might become outdated or less relevant over such a long period. Secondly, maintaining consistent focus and motivation for a lengthy R&D project can be challenging. Thirdly, it increases the risk of cost escalation due to inflation and unforeseen technical hurdles. Finally, it limits NASA's flexibility to pivot to new approaches or technologies that may emerge during the contract's term. Effective program management and regular reviews are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How does this contract's spending compare to other NASA R&D investments in similar scientific areas?

Direct comparison of this $22.17 million contract is difficult without knowing the specific 'plant systems' focus and comparing it to other NASA R&D efforts in that precise niche. NASA's overall R&D budget is substantial, funding a wide array of projects from fundamental science to applied engineering. However, for specialized, long-term R&D awarded on a sole-source basis to a single institution, this amount represents a significant investment. Benchmarking would require identifying other contracts with similar technical scopes, durations, and competition levels within NASA's portfolio or across other federal agencies funding comparable scientific research.

What oversight mechanisms are in place to ensure accountability and value for money on this sole-source, CPAF contract?

Oversight for this sole-source CPAF contract would primarily involve NASA's contracting officer and technical monitors. They are responsible for monitoring contractor performance against the statement of work and the award fee criteria. Regular progress reviews, technical evaluations, and financial audits are standard oversight mechanisms. For CPAF, NASA must establish clear, objective performance metrics and conduct thorough evaluations to determine the award fee, ensuring it reflects actual value delivered. The agency's Inspector General also provides an independent layer of oversight to detect fraud, waste, and abuse.

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: $22,173,853

Exercised Options: $22,173,853

Current Obligation: $22,173,853

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NAS703001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2003-09-30

Current End Date: 2012-09-30

Potential End Date: 2012-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-02-17

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