NASA's $21.5M custodial services contract for GSFC awarded to Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $21,453,292 ($21.5M)
Contractor: Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2004-06-29
End Date: 2009-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,919 days
Daily Burn Rate: $11.2K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: A FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT TO PROVIDE CUSTODIAL SERVICES FOR GSFC AT GREENBELT, MD
Place of Performance
Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGE'S County, MARYLAND, 20771
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $21.5 million to MELWOOD HORTICULTURAL TRAINING CENTER, INC. for work described as: A FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT TO PROVIDE CUSTODIAL SERVICES FOR GSFC AT GREENBELT, MD Key points: 1. Contract awarded as a sole-source procurement, limiting competitive pricing benefits. 2. Services provided are essential for facility maintenance and operational continuity. 3. The contract duration of approximately 5 years suggests a stable, long-term need. 4. Performance is tied to a firm-fixed-price structure, offering cost predictability. 5. The awardee, Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc., has a history with this service. 6. Geographic concentration of services in Greenbelt, Maryland, impacts local workforce.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this custodial services contract is challenging without comparable sole-source awards or detailed service scope. However, the firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for NASA. The total value of over $21 million spread across nearly five years indicates a significant investment in maintaining the Goddard Space Flight Center. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to definitively assess if this represents the best possible value for taxpayer dollars, but it aligns with the expected cost for comprehensive facility upkeep.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not openly competed. This approach is typically used when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the requirement. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from the price discovery and potential cost savings that a competitive bidding process could have provided. The rationale for sole-source procurement would need to be thoroughly documented to ensure it was justified.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers compared to competitively bid contracts, as the absence of multiple bidders reduces pressure on the contractor to offer the lowest possible price.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), ensuring a clean and functional working environment for its personnel and operations. The contract delivers essential custodial and janitorial services, maintaining hygiene and safety standards within the facility. Services are geographically concentrated in Greenbelt, Maryland, directly impacting the local economy and workforce. The contract supports employment opportunities for individuals employed by Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition may result in suboptimal pricing for taxpayers.
- Sole-source justification requires scrutiny to ensure necessity and prevent potential abuse.
- Performance metrics and quality control are critical to ensure service delivery meets NASA's standards without competitive pressure.
Positive Signals
- Award to an organization with a demonstrated history of providing these services to the facility.
- Firm-fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for NASA.
- Essential services ensure operational continuity and a safe working environment at GSFC.
Sector Analysis
The custodial services sector is a vital component of facility management across all government agencies. This contract falls under the broader administrative and support services category. While specific market size data for federal custodial services is not readily available, it represents a consistent and significant expenditure. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large federal facilities' janitorial contracts, though sole-source awards complicate direct comparisons.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses mentioned in the provided data. The awardee, Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc., is a non-profit organization focused on employing individuals with disabilities. Therefore, the direct impact on the broader small business ecosystem is likely minimal, though the organization itself may operate with some small business principles.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under NASA's contracting officer and program management. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract simplifies some aspects of financial oversight, focusing on service delivery. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, but the specifics of performance monitoring and quality assurance would be internal to NASA. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Custodial Services
- NASA Facility Maintenance Contracts
- Goddard Space Flight Center Operations
- Sole-Source Service Contracts
- Administrative Support Services
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing benefits.
- Potential for higher costs due to lack of competition.
- Requires robust performance monitoring to ensure service quality.
Tags
nasa, goddard-space-flight-center, custodial-services, janitorial-services, sole-source, firm-fixed-price, facility-maintenance, maryland, administrative-support, follow-on-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $21.5 million to MELWOOD HORTICULTURAL TRAINING CENTER, INC.. A FOLLOW-ON CONTRACT TO PROVIDE CUSTODIAL SERVICES FOR GSFC AT GREENBELT, MD
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is MELWOOD HORTICULTURAL TRAINING CENTER, INC..
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 $21.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2004-06-29. End: 2009-09-30.
What is the track record of Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc. in providing custodial services to NASA or other federal agencies?
Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc. has a history of providing custodial services, including to NASA at the Goddard Space Flight Center, as indicated by this being a follow-on contract. Their mission often involves employing individuals with disabilities, which may influence their operational structure and cost basis. A deeper dive into their past performance reviews, contract history with various agencies, and any documented successes or challenges would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and effectiveness in fulfilling federal contracts. This specific contract's duration and follow-on nature suggest a level of satisfaction with their past performance, but detailed metrics are needed for a full assessment.
How does the pricing of this contract compare to market rates for similar custodial services, considering it's a sole-source award?
Directly comparing the pricing of this sole-source contract to market rates is challenging due to the lack of competitive bidding. Sole-source awards often do not achieve the same price efficiencies as competitive processes. To assess value, one would need to benchmark the per-square-foot cost or cost per service hour against industry standards for similar facilities (e.g., large government installations or research centers) in the Maryland region. However, without a competitive baseline, it's difficult to definitively state if the price is optimal. NASA's procurement regulations would require justification that the price is fair and reasonable, likely based on historical pricing, cost analysis, or comparison to similar, albeit potentially non-competitive, awards.
What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for essential facility services like custodial care?
The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for essential facility services include potential overpricing due to the absence of competition, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve service quality beyond the contract minimums, and a lack of transparency in the procurement process. Taxpayers may bear a higher cost than necessary. Furthermore, reliance on a single provider can create vulnerability if the contractor experiences financial difficulties, operational issues, or fails to meet performance standards. NASA would need robust oversight mechanisms to mitigate these risks, focusing on performance monitoring, quality control, and ensuring the contractor's continued capability and fair pricing.
How effective are the oversight mechanisms in place for this contract to ensure service quality and prevent cost overruns?
The effectiveness of oversight mechanisms for this contract depends heavily on NASA's internal processes. As a firm-fixed-price contract, the primary financial risk is managed upfront, but oversight must focus on ensuring the contractor meets the defined service levels and quality standards. This typically involves regular inspections, performance reviews, and clear communication channels between NASA personnel and the contractor. NASA's Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) plays a crucial role in monitoring performance. The effectiveness is further bolstered if NASA has established clear Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and remedies for non-performance. Without specific details on NASA's oversight protocols for this contract, a definitive assessment is difficult, but standard government contracting practices imply a structured approach.
What is the historical spending pattern for custodial services at GSFC, and how does this contract fit within that trend?
This contract represents a follow-on award, suggesting a continuation of historical spending for custodial services at GSFC. To understand the trend, one would need to examine previous contracts for these services at the facility, noting their values, durations, and awardees. If this $21.5 million contract over approximately five years is consistent with or shows a reasonable increase (adjusted for inflation) compared to prior periods, it indicates a stable, ongoing requirement and budget allocation. Significant deviations, either increases or decreases, would warrant further investigation into changes in facility size, service scope, or pricing dynamics. The sole-source nature might also indicate a long-standing relationship or specific capability requirement that has persisted over time.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Services to Buildings and Dwellings › Janitorial Services
Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 5606 DOWER HOUSE ROAD, UPPER MARLBORO, MD, 05
Business Categories: AbilityOne Program Participant, Category Business, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $21,687,229
Exercised Options: $21,687,229
Current Obligation: $21,453,292
Timeline
Start Date: 2004-06-29
Current End Date: 2009-09-30
Potential End Date: 2009-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2009-11-24
More Contracts from Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc.
- Facility Maintenance - Vertical — $86.1M (Department of Defense)
- Basops — $53.3M (Department of Defense)
- Base Operations Igf::ot::igf — $48.1M (Department of Defense)
- Custodial, Landscaping and Recycling Services for Gsfc — $30.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Custodial, Landscaping, Recycling, and Trash Removal Services AT National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD — $30.3M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all Melwood Horticultural Training Center, Inc. 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 →