NASA awards $15.6M for R&D support, with KBR Wyle Services securing the task order
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $15,584,154 ($15.6M)
Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2008-04-01
End Date: 2009-03-31
Contract Duration: 364 days
Daily Burn Rate: $42.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: TASK ORDER NNJ08TA38T, CONTRACT NNJ08TA27C MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS TO ACCOMPLISH OBJECTIVES.
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77058
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $15.6 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: TASK ORDER NNJ08TA38T, CONTRACT NNJ08TA27C MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS TO ACCOMPLISH OBJECTIVES. Key points: 1. The contract focuses on management, technical, and administrative skills for research and development objectives. 2. Awarded under a full and open competition, indicating a broad search for qualified contractors. 3. The task order duration is one year, suggesting a defined scope of work. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes performance but can lead to higher costs. 5. The primary NAICS code (541712) points to R&D in physical, engineering, and life sciences. 6. The contract was awarded to KBR Wyle Services, LLC, a known entity in government contracting. 7. The total value of this specific task order is approximately $15.6 million.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
This task order's value of $15.6 million for a one-year R&D support contract appears within a reasonable range for specialized services. However, without specific benchmarks for the exact technical and administrative support required, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure allows for performance-based incentives, which can be beneficial if managed effectively, but also carries the risk of cost overruns if not closely monitored. Comparing this to similar R&D support contracts across NASA or other agencies would provide a clearer picture of its competitiveness.
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,' which suggests that while the competition was broad, certain sources may have been excluded for specific reasons, possibly related to prior performance or specialized capabilities. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' nature implies a competitive process aimed at identifying the best value. This approach generally fosters price discovery and encourages multiple firms to offer their best terms.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining services at competitive prices by allowing a wide range of qualified contractors to bid.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's research and development programs, which receive essential support services. The contract delivers critical management, technical, and administrative skills necessary for achieving R&D objectives. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around NASA facilities where the R&D activities are conducted. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for individuals with specialized R&D support skills.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost Plus Award Fee contracts can sometimes lead to higher final costs if award fees are consistently maximized without strict cost controls.
- The exclusion of sources in a 'full and open' competition, while potentially justified, warrants scrutiny to ensure it did not unduly limit competition.
- The specific nature of 'management, technical, and administrative skills' is broad and could encompass a wide range of activities, making performance monitoring crucial.
Positive Signals
- The use of 'full and open competition' suggests an effort to leverage the broadest possible market for services.
- The Cost Plus Award Fee structure, when managed well, can incentivize high performance and successful project outcomes.
- The contract is for a defined period (one year), allowing for regular reassessment of needs and performance.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically NAICS code 541712, which covers R&D in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences. This sector is characterized by innovation and specialized expertise. Government spending in R&D is crucial for advancing scientific knowledge and technological capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other NASA contracts for similar support services or R&D efforts across agencies like the Department of Defense or the National Science Foundation.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically mandated for small businesses through a set-aside. However, the prime contractor, KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, may still engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill parts of the contract, depending on their own subcontracting strategies and the nature of the services required.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Award Fee contract, NASA contracting officers and technical monitors would be responsible for overseeing the contractor's performance, costs, and the justification for any award fees granted. Transparency would be facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms and potentially through NASA's Inspector General if any issues of fraud, waste, or abuse arise. Accountability is built into the award fee structure, linking contractor compensation to performance metrics.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Scientific and Technical Support Services
- Aerospace Research Support
- Engineering Services Contracts
- Management and Administrative Support
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
- Need for clear performance metrics in R&D context.
- Justification for source exclusion requires review.
- Limited transparency on number of bidders.
Tags
research-and-development, nasa, kbr-wyle-services, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, task-order, management-support, technical-support, administrative-support, texas, physical-sciences, engineering-sciences
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $15.6 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. TASK ORDER NNJ08TA38T, CONTRACT NNJ08TA27C MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS TO ACCOMPLISH OBJECTIVES.
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 $15.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-04-01. End: 2009-03-31.
What is the track record of KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC with NASA for similar R&D support contracts?
KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC has a significant history of contracting with NASA and other federal agencies, often providing a wide array of services including engineering, scientific, and technical support. For NASA specifically, they have been involved in numerous contracts related to space exploration, research, and mission operations. Analyzing their past performance on similar R&D support task orders would involve reviewing contract databases for metrics such as on-time delivery, cost performance, and quality of service. A detailed review would look for any past performance issues, awards, or significant deviations from contract requirements to assess their reliability and capability in fulfilling the objectives of TASK ORDER NNJ08TA38T.
How does the $15.6 million value compare to other NASA R&D support contracts of similar scope and duration?
The $15.6 million value for a one-year R&D support task order awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC needs to be benchmarked against similar contracts. NASA frequently procures R&D support services across various directorates. A comparison would involve identifying contracts with similar NAICS codes (e.g., 541712) and service descriptions (management, technical, administrative skills). Factors like the specific scientific disciplines involved, the level of technical expertise required, and the geographic location of service delivery can influence pricing. Without access to a comprehensive database of NASA's R&D support contract values, it's difficult to definitively state if $15.6 million is high or low. However, for specialized R&D support, this figure appears to be within a plausible range for a single-year effort.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for R&D support?
The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for R&D support revolve around cost control and performance definition. For the government, there's a risk that costs could escalate beyond initial projections, especially if the award fee criteria are not tightly defined or if the contractor prioritizes achieving award fees over strict cost efficiency. For the contractor, the risk lies in not meeting the performance standards required to earn the award fee, thus reducing their overall profit. In R&D, where outcomes can be uncertain, defining objective performance metrics that justify award fees can be challenging. Effective oversight is crucial to mitigate these risks, ensuring that award fees are genuinely earned through exceptional performance rather than routine execution.
What does the 'exclusion of sources' in the competition type imply for this contract?
The competition type 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' indicates that while the contract was intended to be competed broadly, certain potential offerors were deliberately excluded from the bidding process. This exclusion is typically based on specific justifications, such as past performance issues, inability to meet minimum requirements, or proprietary concerns. For taxpayers, this implies that the agency believed excluding these sources would ultimately lead to a better outcome, potentially by focusing the competition on more capable or cost-effective providers. However, it also raises a flag for transparency, as the rationale for exclusion should be well-documented and justifiable to ensure that competition was not unduly stifled.
How has NASA's spending on R&D support services evolved over the years, and where does this contract fit?
NASA's spending on R&D support services has historically been substantial, reflecting its mission-critical research and development activities. This spending fluctuates based on program priorities, budget allocations, and the lifecycle of major projects. Contracts like TASK ORDER NNJ08TA38T, valued at $15.6 million for one year, represent a segment of this broader R&D support expenditure. Analyzing historical spending patterns would involve examining annual reports, budget justifications, and contract award databases to identify trends in the types of R&D support procured, the average contract values, and the primary contractors. This specific task order fits within the ongoing need for specialized expertise to facilitate NASA's scientific and engineering endeavors.
What are the potential impacts of this contract on the broader R&D ecosystem, particularly in Texas?
This contract, awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, which is based in Texas (st: TX, sn: TEXAS), could have a localized economic impact within the state's R&D ecosystem. It supports jobs related to research, engineering, and administration, potentially benefiting local universities, research institutions, and technology firms that may partner with or supply KBR WYLE SERVICES. Furthermore, the success of such contracts can bolster the reputation of Texas-based companies in securing future federal R&D funding, thereby attracting further investment and talent to the region's scientific and technological sectors. The nature of R&D support often involves collaboration and knowledge transfer, which can have ripple effects throughout the scientific community.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D
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 400, GREENBELT, MD, 20770
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $17,166,935
Exercised Options: $17,166,935
Current Obligation: $15,584,154
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNJ08TA27C
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-04-01
Current End Date: 2009-03-31
Potential End Date: 2009-03-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2020-02-27
More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC
- Bioastronautics Contract-Activities for the Health &productivity of Crews Working and Living in Space — $1.5B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Fpds-Ng Mission Systems Operations Contract (msoc) — $1.0B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE Purpose of This Contract IS to Acquire Engineering Services and Related Services to MSD and Related Organizations Throughout Gsfc, AS Required, for the Formulation, Design, Development, Fabrication, Integration, Testing, Verification, and Operations of Space Flight and Ground System Hardware and Software, Including Development and Validation of NEW Technologies to Enable Future Space and Science Missions. the Engineering Areas of Emphasis ARE Multidisciplinary With Concentration in the Mechanical Engineering Areas of Materials, Structural Analysis and Loads, Mechanical Design, Electromechanical Design, Thermal, Contamination and Coatings, Manufacturing and Integration and Test — $728.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200106!000121!1700!F7004 !marine Corps Logistics Base !M6700499C0002 !a!n!*!n!p00015 !20010228!20080930!041014242!041014242!139691877!n!honeywell Technology Solutions!7000 Columbia Gateway Driv!columbia !md!21046!35000!031!12!jacksonville !duval !florida !+000004292865!n!n!000000000000!j049!maint & Repair of Eq/Maintenance & Repair Shop EQ !a4a!combat Vehicles !2000!NOT Discernable or Classified !811310!*!*!3! ! !C!*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !N!J!2!006!B! !C!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!d!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $670.1M (Department of Defense)
- Mission Operations Management Services (moms) — $623.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
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 →