NASA's $10.5M facilities support contract to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, spanning 10 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,517,456 ($10.5M)

Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2005-05-01

End Date: 2015-04-30

Contract Duration: 3,651 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: LOGISTICS

Place of Performance

Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $10.5 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: LOGISTICS Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes performance but can lead to higher costs. 3. Duration of 10 years indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561210 points to facilities support services. 5. The contract was awarded to a single entity, KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. 6. The contract was a Delivery Order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar framework.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $10.5 million contract over 10 years requires more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar facilities support services contracts. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure means the final cost is influenced by performance, making direct price comparisons difficult without knowing the award fees. However, the total value over a decade suggests a significant investment in maintaining NASA's facilities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while the competition was open, certain sources may have been excluded prior to the main bidding process. This suggests a potentially broad but not entirely unrestricted competition. The number of bidders is not specified, which limits the assessment of price discovery effectiveness.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process, even with exclusions, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple firms to offer their best pricing and service proposals.

Public Impact

This contract directly supports NASA's operational infrastructure by ensuring the proper functioning and maintenance of its facilities. Employees of KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, and potentially subcontractors, would be involved in delivering these services. The services are likely concentrated at NASA facilities within Ohio, given the 'OH' and 'OHIO' state indicators. The successful execution of these services is critical for NASA's research, development, and operational missions.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure can lead to costs exceeding initial estimates if performance targets are aggressively pursued or if award fees are consistently high.
  • The exclusion of sources prior to full and open competition raises questions about the breadth of the initial market research and potential limitations on competition.
  • Lack of specific details on the number of bidders makes it difficult to fully assess the competitive pressure on pricing.
  • The long 10-year duration could present risks related to technological obsolescence or changes in service needs over time.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded through a 'full and open competition' process, indicating an effort to solicit a wide range of potential offerors.
  • The contract's long duration suggests a stable, long-term relationship and potentially economies of scale for the contractor.
  • The 'Delivery Order' award type implies it fits within a pre-established contracting vehicle, which can streamline procurement.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services, classified under NAICS code 561210, is a broad sector encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure. This contract likely covers services such as maintenance, repair, custodial, groundskeeping, and potentially specialized support for scientific or operational facilities. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services across various agencies, with spending often benchmarked against private sector rates and other government contracts for similar scopes of work.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) field is false and the 'sb' (small business) field is also false. This suggests the contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, and there's no explicit indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses within the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract appears limited based on the available information.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of NASA's contracting officer and program management. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure implies performance metrics and evaluation criteria that are monitored to determine award fees. Transparency would depend on NASA's internal policies regarding the disclosure of contract details and performance reports. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

  • NASA Facilities Maintenance Contracts
  • Federal Facilities Support Services
  • Logistics and Support Services Contracts
  • Government Operations and Maintenance Contracts

Risk Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
  • Limited transparency on number of bidders.
  • Risk of service scope misalignment with evolving facility needs over 10 years.
  • Potential for contractor complacency in long-term contracts.

Tags

facilities-support, nasa, kbr-wyle-services-llc, cost-plus-award-fee, delivery-order, full-and-open-competition, long-term-contract, ohio, logistics, support-services, government-contracting

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $10.5 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. LOGISTICS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC.

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 $10.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-05-01. End: 2015-04-30.

What specific types of facilities support services are included under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 561210, which covers Facilities Support Services. This broad category typically includes a range of services essential for the operation and maintenance of buildings and grounds. While specific line items are not detailed, common services under such contracts include routine maintenance and repair of building systems (HVAC, electrical, plumbing), custodial services, groundskeeping, pest control, waste management, and potentially specialized support tailored to the unique needs of NASA facilities, such as laboratory support or cleanroom maintenance. The exact scope would be defined in the contract's statement of work.

How does the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) structure compare to other contract types for similar services?

The CPAF structure is a type of cost-reimbursement contract where the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fee that has two components: a fixed base fee and an award fee. The award fee is earned based on the contractor's performance against pre-determined criteria. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPAF offers more flexibility for the government when requirements are uncertain or performance is difficult to define precisely, as it incentivizes contractor performance. However, it carries a higher risk of cost overrun than FFP, as costs are reimbursed, and the award fee can significantly increase the total payment. It differs from Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) by having a subjective award fee component determined by the government, rather than a formulaic adjustment based on cost or schedule targets.

What is the significance of the contract being a 'Delivery Order'?

A 'Delivery Order' typically signifies that this contract is a task order issued under a larger, pre-existing indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar master agreement. This means that the foundational terms, conditions, and often the overall ceiling amount were established previously, likely through a competitive process. The issuance of a Delivery Order then specifies the exact goods or services to be delivered, quantities, delivery dates, and prices for that specific order. For taxpayers, this implies that the initial competition for the overarching IDIQ contract likely occurred earlier, and this Delivery Order represents a specific call against that established framework, potentially streamlining the procurement process for this particular need.

What does 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' imply about the procurement process?

This contract clause indicates a nuanced approach to competition. 'Full and open competition' means that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid or proposal. However, the phrase 'after exclusion of sources' suggests that prior to the main solicitation, certain potential offerors or types of offerors may have been removed from consideration, possibly due to pre-qualification requirements, specific capabilities needed, or other criteria outlined in the solicitation. This could imply that while the final competition was broad, it wasn't entirely unrestricted from the outset. The implications for taxpayers are that while competition was sought, the exclusion of certain sources might have limited the potential for the absolute lowest price if those excluded sources were highly competitive.

What are the potential risks associated with a 10-year contract duration for facilities support?

A 10-year duration for facilities support services presents several potential risks. Firstly, technological advancements in building management, maintenance, and energy efficiency could render current methods or equipment obsolete, requiring costly upgrades or changes in service scope. Secondly, the needs of the facility itself might evolve over a decade due to changes in NASA's mission, research focus, or operational requirements, potentially making the original scope of work less relevant or insufficient. Thirdly, long-term contracts can sometimes lead to contractor complacency or a decrease in innovation if not managed proactively with strong performance incentives and oversight. Finally, economic fluctuations over such a long period could impact the contractor's cost structure, potentially leading to requests for equitable adjustments if not adequately addressed in the contract's terms.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesFacilities Support ServicesFacilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT)MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7701 GREENBELT RD STE 400, GREENBELT, MD, 20770

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,517,456

Exercised Options: $10,517,456

Current Obligation: $10,517,456

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NNC05CB17C

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-05-01

Current End Date: 2015-04-30

Potential End Date: 2015-04-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2016-05-24

More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC

View all KBR Wyle Services, LLC federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending