NASA awards $44.4M for Goddard Space Flight Center facility design and construction services to PTSI Managed Services Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $44,441,680 ($44.4M)

Contractor: Ptsi Managed Services Inc

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2011-04-19

End Date: 2016-04-18

Contract Duration: 1,826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $24.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH A MULTITUDE OF SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH FACILITY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, AND OTHER RELATED TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR THE GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER (GSFC). THIS WILL PREDOMINANTLY INVOLVE WORK AT THE GREENBELT CAMPUS, BUT MAY INVOLVE WORK AT OTHER FACILITIES ON ASSETS FOR WHICH GSFC IS RESPONSIBLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE ITS WORKFORCE AT THE GSFC GREENBELT CAMPUS. EXCEPT WHERE SPECIFIED AS "GOVERNMENT PROVIDED", THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, EQUIPMENT, TOOLS, MANAGEMENT, COORDINATION, AND QUALITY CONTROL NECESSARY FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES UNDER THIS CONTRACT.

Place of Performance

Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20771

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $44.4 million to PTSI MANAGED SERVICES INC for work described as: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH A MULTITUDE OF SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH FACILITY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, AND OTHER RELATED TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR THE GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER (GSFC). THIS WILL PREDOMINANTLY INVOLVE WORK AT THE GREENBELT CAMPUS, BUT MAY INVOLVE WORK AT OTHER FAC… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on facility design, construction, and related technical services for Goddard Space Flight Center. 2. Work primarily at Greenbelt campus, with potential for other GSFC-managed assets. 3. Contractor required to provide all labor, materials, and equipment. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type indicates defined scope and cost certainty. 5. Performance period spans over five years, from April 2011 to April 2016. 6. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $44.4 million over five years for facility design and construction services at a major NASA center appears reasonable. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction and facility management contracts for government installations suggests this is within expected cost ranges. The firm fixed-price structure helps control costs for the government, provided the scope was well-defined at the outset. Without specific details on the scope of work or comparable project costs, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the competitive award process supports a presumption of fair pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant facility services contract. A higher number of bidders might typically lead to more aggressive pricing, but three bids can still result in a competitive outcome, especially for specialized services like those required for a space flight center.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and encourage innovation. The fact that multiple companies vied for this contract suggests that taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently.

Public Impact

Benefits NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center by ensuring necessary facility maintenance and upgrades. Supports scientific research and space exploration missions by providing a stable operational environment. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction and facility management professionals. Geographic impact is concentrated in Maryland, specifically around the Greenbelt campus.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in facility construction and design projects if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single contractor for a broad range of facility services could create dependency.
Ensuring consistent quality across all services and materials provided by the contractor is crucial.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process.
Long-term contract (5 years) allows for stable planning and execution of facility projects.
Contractor is required to provide all necessary labor, materials, and equipment.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a broad category encompassing the design, construction, and maintenance of non-residential buildings. Spending in this sector for government facilities is substantial, driven by the need to maintain and upgrade infrastructure for various agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large federal construction and facility management contracts, particularly those awarded to NASA or other science and technology-focused agencies. The market for these services is competitive, with many firms capable of undertaking such projects.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting requirements for small businesses. As a large contract awarded under full and open competition, it is likely that larger, established firms were the primary bidders. The absence of specific small business provisions means that the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center contracting officers and project managers. They are responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and approving payments. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction isn't detailed here, the NASA OIG would have oversight authority over potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Operations Support
Federal Building and Facility Construction
Architectural and Engineering Services
Base Operations Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Extended performance period may increase risk of cost escalation if not managed.
Potential for scope creep in facility design and construction projects.
Reliance on contractor for comprehensive facility services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $44.4 million to PTSI MANAGED SERVICES INC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH A MULTITUDE OF SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH FACILITY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, AND OTHER RELATED TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR THE GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER (GSFC). THIS WILL PREDOMINANTLY INVOLVE WORK AT THE GREENBELT CAMPUS, BUT MAY INVOLVE WORK AT OTHER FACILITIES ON ASSETS FOR WHICH GSFC IS RESPONSIBLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE ITS WORKFORCE AT THE GSFC GREENBELT CAMPUS. EXCEPT WHERE SPECIFIED AS "GOVERNMENT PROVIDED", THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL MATERIALS, LABOR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PTSI MANAGED SERVICES 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 $44.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-04-19. End: 2016-04-18.

What was the specific scope of 'other related technical services' included in this contract?

The contract broadly defines 'other related technical services' in conjunction with facility design and construction for the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). While the primary focus is on physical infrastructure, these technical services could encompass a range of activities necessary for the successful completion of facility projects. This might include, but is not limited to, site surveys, environmental assessments, specialized engineering consultations, systems integration for new facilities, security system design and installation, and potentially IT infrastructure planning within the constructed or renovated spaces. The exact nature and extent of these services would typically be detailed in the Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS) attached to the contract, which are not provided in the summary data. Without access to these detailed documents, the precise scope remains somewhat generalized.

How did the pricing of the three bids compare, and what does this suggest about the value for money?

The provided data indicates that three bids were received for this contract, awarded under full and open competition. However, the specific pricing details of these bids are not publicly available in the summary. Generally, when multiple bids are received, a comparison of their pricing can offer insights into value for money. If the bids were closely clustered, it might suggest a well-understood scope and competitive market. A wide variance in bids could indicate differing interpretations of the scope, varying levels of technical approach, or significant differences in overhead and profit margins. Without the actual bid prices, it's impossible to definitively assess the value for money achieved, other than to note that the competitive process itself is intended to yield fair pricing. The final awarded price of $44.4 million represents the government's determination of a fair and reasonable cost based on the received proposals.

What are the potential risks associated with a five-year firm fixed-price contract for facility construction?

A significant risk with a five-year firm fixed-price (FFP) contract for facility construction is the potential for unforeseen changes in material costs or labor rates over the extended period. While FFP aims to provide cost certainty, significant market fluctuations could erode the contractor's profit margin, potentially leading to pressure to cut corners on quality or scope, or to seek change orders. Another risk is the difficulty in precisely defining all aspects of facility design and construction needs at the outset for a project spanning several years. Incomplete or ambiguous requirements can lead to disputes, change orders, and cost overruns, despite the FFP structure. Furthermore, if the initial scope definition was flawed or underestimated, the contractor might face substantial losses, potentially impacting their ability to complete the project satisfactorily. Effective government oversight and a robust change management process are critical to mitigate these risks.

What is the historical spending pattern for facility design and construction at Goddard Space Flight Center?

The provided data only details a single contract award of $44.4 million from 2011 to 2016 for facility design and construction services at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to analyze contract awards over a longer period, looking at multiple contracts for similar services. This would involve querying federal procurement databases for GSFC's spending on facility maintenance, renovation, design, and construction. Key metrics to examine would include the total annual spending on these services, the average contract value, the types of contracts awarded (e.g., FFP, cost-plus), the number of competitors, and the primary contractors utilized. Without this broader dataset, it's impossible to establish a trend or pattern beyond this specific contract's duration and value.

How does PTSI Managed Services Inc.'s track record influence the assessment of this contract?

The provided data identifies PTSI Managed Services Inc. as the contractor but does not include details about their specific track record, past performance ratings, or experience with similar NASA projects. A thorough assessment would require reviewing their performance on previous government contracts, including any awards, terminations, or disputes. A strong track record with successful project completion, adherence to schedule and budget, and positive past performance reviews would increase confidence in the successful execution of this contract. Conversely, a history of performance issues or contract disputes would raise concerns and necessitate closer monitoring. Without this specific performance history, the assessment relies more heavily on the contract's structure (FFP, competitive award) and the oversight mechanisms in place.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR RESTOR ACVIVS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 100 W WALNUT ST, PASADENA, CA, 91124

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $44,441,680

Exercised Options: $44,441,680

Current Obligation: $44,441,680

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 155

Total Subaward Amount: $53,895,373

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NNG11AZ08C

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline