NASA's $29.2M Caltech contract for battle simulation research spanned nearly a decade

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,233,813 ($29.2M)

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: $8.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 51

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: CORPS BATTLE SIMULATION

Place of Performance

Location: PASADENA, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91125

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $29.2 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY for work described as: CORPS BATTLE SIMULATION Key points: 1. Contract focused on advanced simulation and modeling for complex systems. 2. Long duration suggests a sustained need for specialized research capabilities. 3. Sole-source award may limit competitive pricing and innovation. 4. Performance period extended significantly beyond initial award. 5. Research and Development sector, with a focus on physical and engineering sciences. 6. Contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) can incentivize performance but requires careful oversight.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific R&D contract is challenging due to its specialized nature and sole-source award. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure, while common for R&D, can lead to higher costs if not managed rigorously. Without comparable sole-source contracts for similar advanced simulation research, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing was optimal. The extended duration and significant total value indicate a substantial investment, but the precise value-for-money proposition is not immediately clear without deeper analysis of deliverables and outcomes.

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 typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities or intellectual property essential for the requirement. While this can ensure access to specialized expertise, it bypasses the competitive process, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced pressure for cost efficiency. The lack of competition means there were no other bidders to compare against, limiting price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there was no opportunity to benefit from competitive bidding, which could have potentially driven down costs. The government relied on negotiation to secure a fair price, but the absence of alternatives limits the assurance of obtaining the best possible value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is NASA, which gains advanced simulation capabilities for its research objectives. Services delivered include research and development in physical and engineering sciences, likely contributing to improved modeling and analysis tools. Geographic impact is primarily within California, where Caltech is located, but the research findings could have broader national implications. Workforce implications include specialized research positions at Caltech, contributing to the scientific and engineering talent pool.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Sole-source award limits price competition and potential for cost savings.
  • Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires robust oversight to ensure cost control and prevent overruns.
  • Long contract duration (9 years) may indicate potential scope creep or difficulty in defining fixed requirements upfront.
  • Lack of detailed performance metrics in the provided data makes it hard to assess the effectiveness of the award fee component.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded to a reputable research institution (Caltech) with a strong track record in scientific research.
  • Focus on R&D in critical areas like simulation and modeling can lead to significant technological advancements.
  • Long-term engagement suggests a stable and productive working relationship between NASA and the contractor.
  • The contract supported specialized scientific research, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in physical and engineering sciences.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The market for advanced simulation and modeling is highly specialized, often dominated by academic institutions and niche technology firms. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without knowing the exact nature of the simulation, but R&D contracts can range widely in value. NASA's investment in this area aligns with broader government efforts to leverage advanced computational tools for scientific discovery and technological innovation.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have involved small business set-asides, as indicated by the 'sb': false field. Given the specialized nature of advanced simulation research and the sole-source award to a large research institution, it is unlikely that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses were a primary focus or requirement of this specific award. The contract's nature suggests a direct research collaboration rather than a procurement of goods or services typically outsourced to smaller enterprises.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's program management and contracting officers. As a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, rigorous oversight is crucial to monitor costs, evaluate performance against defined criteria, and determine award fees. Transparency would depend on NASA's internal reporting and any public disclosures related to the research outcomes. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

  • NASA Research and Development Programs
  • Advanced Simulation and Modeling Contracts
  • Aerospace Research Contracts
  • University Research Partnerships

Risk Flags

  • Sole-source award
  • Cost Plus Award Fee contract type
  • Long contract duration

Tags

research-and-development, nasa, california, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, simulation-technology, aerospace, long-term-contract, physical-sciences, engineering-sciences

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $29.2 million to CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. CORPS BATTLE SIMULATION

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 $29.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

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

What specific advancements or deliverables resulted from this $29.2 million Caltech contract for battle simulation research?

The provided data does not detail the specific advancements or deliverables from this contract. However, given the contract's focus on 'CORPS BATTLE SIMULATION' and its R&D nature, it likely involved the development, refinement, or application of sophisticated simulation models and software. These could have been used for training, strategic planning, or analyzing complex operational scenarios. The extended duration suggests iterative development and testing. To ascertain specific outcomes, one would need to consult NASA's project reports, Caltech's research publications, or contract close-out documentation, which are not publicly available in this dataset.

How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure typically function in R&D contracts like this one, and what are its implications for cost control?

The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred plus a base fee, with the potential for an additional award fee based on performance against pre-defined criteria. For R&D contracts, CPAF aims to incentivize high performance and innovation by linking a portion of the contractor's profit to meeting or exceeding specific objectives. However, it requires robust government oversight to define clear performance metrics, objectively evaluate progress, and ensure that costs remain reasonable. The implication for cost control is that while the government covers incurred costs, the award fee component can escalate the total price if performance is exceptional. Conversely, poorly defined metrics or weak oversight can lead to cost overruns without commensurate performance gains.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source R&D contract awarded for nearly a decade?

A sole-source R&D contract awarded for nearly a decade carries several potential risks. Firstly, the lack of competition means NASA may not have achieved the best possible price or benefited from innovative solutions that a competitive bidding process might have yielded. Secondly, the long duration, coupled with a sole-source award, increases the risk of contractor complacency or a lack of urgency in delivering results, as there's no competitive pressure. Thirdly, requirements may evolve significantly over nine years, and a fixed sole-source relationship might hinder flexibility in adapting the contract or bringing in new expertise if needed. Finally, without competitive benchmarking, assessing the ongoing value for money throughout the contract's life becomes more challenging for the agency.

Can the $29.2 million total award value be considered high or low for a nearly 9-year R&D contract in simulation technology?

Determining whether $29.2 million over approximately 9 years (3288 days) is high or low for an R&D contract in simulation technology is complex without specific context. The average annual value is roughly $3.2 million. This figure could be considered moderate to high depending on the scope, complexity, and uniqueness of the research. Contracts involving cutting-edge simulation for defense or aerospace applications, requiring highly specialized expertise and facilities, can command significant funding. Conversely, if the simulation was for a more common application or involved incremental improvements, the cost might be viewed differently. Benchmarking requires comparing it to similar sole-source R&D efforts with comparable objectives and durations, which are not readily available.

What is the significance of the NAICS code 541710 (Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences) for this contract?

The NAICS code 541710 signifies that the primary business activity of the contractor, California Institute of Technology (Caltech), under this contract was conducting research and development in the physical sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, astronomy), engineering sciences (e.g., mechanical, electrical, aerospace engineering), and life sciences (e.g., biology, medicine, agriculture). For this specific contract, it indicates that the work performed by Caltech involved fundamental or applied research aimed at discovering new knowledge or developing new or improved products, processes, or services within these scientific domains, specifically related to battle simulation.

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: $30,617,500

Exercised Options: $30,617,500

Current Obligation: $29,233,813

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: 2020-02-12

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