NASA's $41.3M contract for aerospace modeling and simulation services awarded to Science Applications International Corporation
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $41,282,380 ($41.3M)
Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2014-11-01
End Date: 2018-05-31
Contract Duration: 1,307 days
Daily Burn Rate: $31.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: IGF::CT,CL::IGF TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR AEROSPACE SYSTEMS MODELING AND SIMULATION II (SIMLABS II)
Place of Performance
Location: MOFFETT FIELD, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94035
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $41.3 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: IGF::CT,CL::IGF TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR AEROSPACE SYSTEMS MODELING AND SIMULATION II (SIMLABS II) Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in advanced aerospace simulation capabilities. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration of over three years indicates a need for sustained support. 4. Awarded to a single contractor, highlighting the specialized nature of the services. 5. Performance-based contract type may incentivize contractor efficiency and effectiveness. 6. Geographic concentration in California for service delivery.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $41.3 million over approximately 3.5 years for specialized aerospace modeling and simulation services appears reasonable given the technical complexity. Benchmarking against similar large-scale simulation contracts is challenging without more granular data on specific deliverables. However, the cost-plus award fee structure suggests that the agency aimed to incentivize performance while managing costs, which is a positive sign for value.
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 two bidders identified, the competition level was limited but present. This suggests that while there was some market interest, the specialized nature of the requirements may have restricted the number of capable offerors. The presence of competition, even if limited, likely contributed to price discovery and prevented a sole-source situation.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process, even with two bidders, generally leads to better pricing for taxpayers compared to sole-source awards. It ensures that the selected contractor must offer competitive terms to win the contract.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA and its aerospace research and development programs, which gain access to advanced modeling and simulation tools. Services delivered include technical support for aerospace systems modeling and simulation, crucial for design, testing, and validation. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the contractor is located and likely where the services will be performed. Workforce implications include the employment of highly skilled engineers and scientists by the contractor to fulfill the contract requirements.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited competition (2 bidders) could potentially lead to higher prices than a more robust bidding environment.
- Cost-plus award fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully by the agency.
- The specific performance metrics and award fee criteria are not detailed, making it difficult to fully assess performance incentives.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, ensuring a fair process.
- The use of a performance-based contract structure (Cost Plus Award Fee) aims to align contractor incentives with agency goals.
- The contractor, Science Applications International Corporation, is a well-established entity in the government contracting space, suggesting experience and capability.
Sector Analysis
The aerospace industry relies heavily on advanced modeling and simulation for the design, testing, and optimization of aircraft, spacecraft, and related systems. This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting R&D and technical services for aerospace applications. The market for such specialized services is competitive, with a few large prime contractors and numerous niche players. NASA's spending in this area is critical for maintaining its technological edge and ensuring mission success.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have been set aside for small businesses, as indicated by the 'sb': false flag. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight. The Inspector General of NASA would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific performance details may be proprietary.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Aerospace Engineering Services
- Modeling and Simulation Support
- Science Applications International Corporation Contracts
Risk Flags
- Limited Competition
- Potential for Cost Overruns (CPAF structure)
- Reliance on Specialized Expertise
Tags
nasa, aerospace, modeling-and-simulation, engineering-services, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, science-applications-international-corporation, california, research-and-development, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $41.3 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. IGF::CT,CL::IGF TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR AEROSPACE SYSTEMS MODELING AND SIMULATION II (SIMLABS II)
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.
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 $41.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2014-11-01. End: 2018-05-31.
What is the track record of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) with NASA for similar services?
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has a long-standing history of contracting with NASA and other federal agencies, providing a wide range of technical, engineering, and IT services. For NASA specifically, SAIC has been involved in numerous contracts supporting space exploration, aeronautics research, and mission operations. Their experience often includes complex systems engineering, simulation, data analysis, and IT infrastructure support. While this specific contract (SIMLABS II) focuses on aerospace systems modeling and simulation, SAIC's broader portfolio with NASA suggests a deep understanding of the agency's technical requirements and operational environment. Their consistent awards indicate a perceived capability and reliability by NASA in delivering complex technical solutions.
How does the value of this contract compare to other NASA contracts for modeling and simulation services?
The $41.3 million value for this 3.5-year contract for aerospace modeling and simulation services is substantial but falls within the typical range for large-scale, specialized engineering support contracts awarded by NASA. NASA frequently awards multi-million dollar contracts for R&D, systems engineering, and technical support. Contracts for advanced simulation capabilities, especially those involving complex aerospace systems, often require significant investment. Without access to a comprehensive database of all NASA modeling and simulation contracts, a precise benchmark is difficult. However, considering the duration and the specialized nature of 'aerospace systems modeling and simulation,' this award appears commensurate with the scope of work typically required for such critical support functions within the agency.
What are the primary risks associated with this type of contract for NASA?
The primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for NASA include potential cost overruns if the award fee criteria are not tightly managed and performance incentives are not effectively structured. There's also a risk related to the limited competition, with only two bidders, which could mean less aggressive pricing than a more robustly competed contract. Another risk is ensuring the contractor maintains the highly specialized technical expertise required throughout the contract's duration, given the rapid evolution of modeling and simulation technologies. Finally, ensuring seamless integration of the contractor's simulation capabilities with NASA's existing systems and future program needs presents a technical and programmatic risk.
How effective is the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract structure in ensuring program effectiveness for NASA?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure is designed to enhance program effectiveness by incentivizing the contractor to meet or exceed performance objectives. NASA establishes specific performance criteria, and the contractor earns a base fee plus an award fee based on how well they meet these targets. This structure encourages high-quality work and efficiency, as the contractor has a direct financial incentive to perform exceptionally. For complex R&D and technical services like aerospace modeling and simulation, where outcomes can be difficult to predict precisely upfront, CPAF allows for flexibility while pushing for superior results. Its effectiveness hinges on NASA's ability to define clear, measurable, and relevant performance standards and to objectively evaluate the contractor's performance against them.
What are historical spending patterns for engineering and simulation services at NASA?
NASA historically spends significant amounts on engineering services, research and development, and specialized technical support, including modeling and simulation. These expenditures are critical for mission success across aeronautics and space exploration. Annual spending can fluctuate based on program priorities, major project phases (e.g., design, testing, operations), and budget allocations. Contracts for simulation and modeling are often long-term, reflecting the sustained need for these capabilities. While specific figures vary year to year, NASA consistently ranks among the top federal agencies for contracting in these technical domains, reflecting its ongoing commitment to innovation and complex mission execution.
What is the significance of the 'Engineering Services' (NAICS 541330) classification for this contract?
The NAICS code 541330, 'Engineering Services,' signifies that the primary purpose of this contract is to procure professional engineering services. This includes activities such as research, design, development, testing, and consultation related to engineering projects. For NASA's aerospace modeling and simulation contract, this classification is highly appropriate as it encompasses the core technical expertise required. It indicates that the contractor is expected to provide specialized engineering knowledge and capabilities to support the development, analysis, and validation of aerospace systems through advanced simulation techniques, rather than just routine technical support or manufacturing.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › General Science and Technology R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1710 SAIC DR, MCLEAN, VA, 22102
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $52,569,392
Exercised Options: $49,504,654
Current Obligation: $41,282,380
Actual Outlays: $39,252
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 76
Total Subaward Amount: $10,721,841
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2014-11-01
Current End Date: 2018-05-31
Potential End Date: 2018-05-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2024-07-24
More Contracts from Science Applications International Corporation
- Task Order to Provide Project Management Support, Transition Support, Engineering and Design Support, Securing the Infrastructure Support and O&M Support for the Department's IT Consolidation Program — $2.1B (Department of State)
- Software Life Cycle Development — $1.4B (General Services Administration)
- Unified Nasa Information Technology Services (unites) — $1.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE Scope of the to IS to Provide Enterprise IT Services for the Usace — $1.1B (General Services Administration)
- This Effort IS for a Follow on Procurement Requirement. the Name of This Procurement IS the Omnibus Multidiscipline Engineering Services (omes) II. the Principal Purpose of This Contract IS to Provide Multidiscipline Engineering Support Services and Related Work to EED, Istd, SED, MSD, Mesa, Jpss, Ssco, and Related Organizations, AS Required, for the Study, Design, Systems Engineering, Development, Fabrication, Integration, Testing, Verification, and Operations of Space Flight, Airborne, and Ground System Hardware and Software, Including Development and Validation of NEW Technologies to Enable Future Space and Science Missions. to This END, the Contractor Shall Provide On/Off-Site Multidiscipline Engineering Services, Pursuant to Task Orders Issued by the Contracting Officer. These Services Shall Include the Personnel, Facilities, and Materials (unless Otherwise Provided by the Government) to Accomplish the Tasks. Travel MAY BE Required by the Contractor to Support Certain Task Orders, These Travel Requirements Will BE Identified on a Task by Task Basis — $1.0B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all Science Applications International Corporation federal contracts →
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 →