NASA's Glenn Research Center awards over $140M for facilities support, with Alcyon Technical Services JV as prime

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $140,830,628 ($140.8M)

Contractor: Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2015-10-01

End Date: 2026-06-30

Contract Duration: 3,925 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF - TECHNICAL INFORMATION, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND LOGISTICS SERVICES (TIALS 2) TO SUPPORT THE INSTITUTIONAL NEEDS OF NASA'S GLENN RESEARCH CENTER. LOGISTICS TASK.

Place of Performance

Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $140.8 million to ALCYON TECHNICAL SERVICES (ATS) JV, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF - TECHNICAL INFORMATION, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND LOGISTICS SERVICES (TIALS 2) TO SUPPORT THE INSTITUTIONAL NEEDS OF NASA'S GLENN RESEARCH CENTER. LOGISTICS TASK. Key points: 1. The contract focuses on logistics tasks to support NASA Glenn Research Center's institutional needs. 2. Awarded to Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC, this represents a significant investment in facility operations. 3. The contract duration spans from October 2015 to June 2026, indicating a long-term support requirement. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which allows for flexibility but requires careful cost monitoring. 5. The procurement method was Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources, suggesting a competitive process. 6. This award falls under Facilities Support Services, a critical but often overlooked sector for government operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value-for-money for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and performance metrics. The total award value of $140.8 million over approximately 10 years suggests a substantial operational budget. However, the lack of specific performance data or comparison to similar contracts makes a definitive value assessment difficult. The fixed fee component needs to be analyzed against the scope of work to determine if it represents fair compensation for the contractor's efforts.

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.' This indicates that while the competition was open, certain sources may have been excluded for specific reasons, which warrants further investigation. The number of bidders and the specific criteria for exclusion are not detailed, making it difficult to fully assess the breadth of competition. A competitive process is generally positive for price discovery, but the exclusion of sources could potentially limit the range of offers received.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of the award, despite potential source exclusions, suggests an effort to secure reasonable pricing for taxpayers. However, understanding the rationale behind any source exclusions is crucial to ensure that the most cost-effective solutions were considered.

Public Impact

NASA's Glenn Research Center benefits from consistent and reliable logistics and administrative support. The contract ensures the smooth functioning of institutional operations at the research center. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for individuals with logistics and administrative skills. The geographic impact is concentrated at NASA's Glenn Research Center in Ohio.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

• Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can incentivize cost overruns if not managed diligently.
• The 'Exclusion of Sources' in the competition method requires scrutiny to ensure fairness and optimal pricing.
• Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it hard to assess the true value for money.
• Long contract duration could lead to complacency or reduced innovation if not actively managed.

Positive Signals

• Awarded through a full and open competition process, indicating a structured procurement.
• Long-term contract provides stability for essential support services at NASA Glenn.
• The contractor, Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC, is a joint venture, potentially bringing diverse expertise.
• The contract supports critical institutional needs, ensuring operational continuity.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services is a broad category encompassing a wide range of services essential for the operation and maintenance of government facilities. This sector is characterized by a mix of large, established service providers and smaller, specialized firms. Government spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need to maintain complex infrastructure across numerous agencies. This contract fits within the broader trend of outsourcing non-core functions to specialized contractors to improve efficiency and focus agency resources on primary missions. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot for facility maintenance and operations across similar government installations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large contract awarded to a joint venture, it is unlikely that small businesses will be directly subcontracted unless specified in the contract's subcontracting plan. The impact on the small business ecosystem depends on whether ATS JV has a robust subcontracting plan that includes opportunities for small businesses, particularly those in the facilities support and logistics sectors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure necessitates close monitoring of costs incurred by the contractor to ensure they align with the contract's objectives and the fixed fee remains reasonable. Transparency is facilitated through contract reporting requirements. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction is not detailed, NASA's Office of Inspector General would have oversight authority for potential fraud, waste, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

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

Risk Flags

• Long contract duration may increase cost escalation risk.
• Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure requires diligent cost oversight.
• Potential for limited competition due to 'Exclusion of Sources' needs clarification.
• Lack of detailed performance metrics hinders value assessment.

Tags

facilities-support, logistics, nasa, glenn-research-center, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, delivery-order, ohio, service-contract, long-term-contract

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $140.8 million to ALCYON TECHNICAL SERVICES (ATS) JV, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF - TECHNICAL INFORMATION, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND LOGISTICS SERVICES (TIALS 2) TO SUPPORT THE INSTITUTIONAL NEEDS OF NASA'S GLENN RESEARCH CENTER. LOGISTICS TASK.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALCYON TECHNICAL SERVICES (ATS) JV, 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 $140.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-10-01. End: 2026-06-30.

What is the track record of Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC with NASA or similar federal agencies?

Information regarding the specific track record of Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC is not provided in the data. To assess their performance, one would need to review past performance evaluations, contract histories, and any reported issues or commendations from previous federal contracts. Joint ventures often combine the strengths of their parent companies, so understanding the experience of the individual entities within the JV would also be beneficial. A review of federal procurement databases like SAM.gov or FPDS could reveal their contract history and performance ratings, if publicly available. Without this specific data, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability and past success in delivering similar services.

How does the cost structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) compare to industry standards for similar facilities support services?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common in government contracting, particularly for services where the scope may evolve or is difficult to define precisely upfront. For facilities support services, CPFF allows the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee. While this provides flexibility, it can incentivize higher costs if not managed rigorously, as the fee is fixed regardless of the final cost. Industry standards vary, but many long-term service contracts might utilize fixed-price models for well-defined scopes or hybrid approaches. The 'fairness' of the fee depends on the complexity of the work, the level of risk assumed by the contractor, and the profit margins typical in the facilities management sector. Benchmarking this fee against similar NASA or DoD contracts for comparable services would be necessary for a precise assessment.

What are the specific 'logistics tasks' covered under this contract, and how are they measured for performance?

The provided data snippet only broadly categorizes the contract as supporting 'institutional needs' with a 'logistics task.' Specific details regarding the scope of these logistics tasks, such as inventory management, supply chain operations, transportation, warehousing, or equipment maintenance, are not included. Performance measurement would typically be outlined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Work (SOW), detailing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Service Level Agreements (SLAs). Examples of metrics could include on-time delivery rates, inventory accuracy, cost savings achieved, or response times for logistical support requests. Without access to the PWS/SOW, a detailed understanding of the tasks and their performance metrics is not possible.

What is the historical spending pattern for facilities support services at NASA's Glenn Research Center?

The provided data only includes details for this specific contract award of $140.8 million. To understand historical spending patterns for facilities support services at NASA's Glenn Research Center, one would need to analyze aggregated spending data over multiple fiscal years. This would involve querying federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending.gov) for all contracts awarded to Glenn Research Center within the 'Facilities Support Services' NAICS code (561210) or related categories. Examining trends in total spending, average contract values, and the number of contracts awarded over time would reveal patterns and indicate whether this $140.8 million award represents a significant increase, decrease, or continuation of previous spending levels.

What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration contract (2015-2026) for facilities support?

Long-duration contracts, like this one spanning nearly 11 years, present several potential risks. Firstly, the risk of cost escalation is higher, as economic conditions, labor costs, and material prices can fluctuate significantly over such a period, potentially impacting the contractor's ability to maintain profitability without seeking adjustments. Secondly, there's a risk of service degradation or complacency; without regular re-competition or strong performance management, the contractor might become less incentivized to innovate or maintain peak performance. Thirdly, technological advancements in facilities management could render current methods or equipment obsolete, requiring costly upgrades or contract modifications. Finally, changes in agency mission or budget priorities could lead to contract scope changes or early termination, creating uncertainty. Robust contract management, clear performance metrics, and regular reviews are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities 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

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV LLC

Address: 4801 UNIVERSITY SQUARE STE 31, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35816

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Joint Venture Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Joint Venture Women Owned Small Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, SBA Certified 8 a Joint Venture, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $155,027,639

Exercised Options: $148,061,822

Current Obligation: $140,830,628

Actual Outlays: $67,317,459

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 952

Total Subaward Amount: $77,853,230

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NNC16CA11C

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2015-10-01

Current End Date: 2026-06-30

Potential End Date: 2027-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2026-04-09

More Contracts from Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC

• Systems Engineering Advanced Services (seas). Under This Contract, the Contractor Shall Provide Mission and Instrument Systems Engineering (m&ise) Services to the Mission Engineering&systems Analysis Division and Related Applied Engineering and Technology Directorate Organizations for the Formulation and Implementation of Flight and Ground Systems AS Well AS Development and Validation of NEW Technologies — $350.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• - Technical Information, Administrative, and Logistics Services (tials 2) to Support the Institutional Needs of Nasa's Glenn Research Center. Administrative and Clerical Task — $72.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• Tials 2 - Stock Purchases — $12.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
• - Technical Information, Administrative, and Logistics Services (tials 2) to Support the Institutional Needs of Nasa's Glenn Research Center. Management Task. Management Services Task — $9.3M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)

View all Alcyon Technical Services (ATS) JV, LLC 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 →

Explore Related Government Spending