NASA's $140.8M Medical and Environmental Support Contract Awarded to Innomedic Health Applications, Inc
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $140,813,772 ($140.8M)
Contractor: Inomedic Health Applications, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2008-10-01
End Date: 2015-10-31
Contract Duration: 2,586 days
Daily Burn Rate: $54.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Healthcare
Official Description: MEDICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT CONTRACT (MESC). NOTE: PROCUREMENT IS ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE BUT SYSTEM WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS OPTION. THE CONTRACT HAS FAR 52.223-9 BUT NOT FAR 52.223-4. AWARD CORRECTED TO RECEIVE SUSTAINABILITY CREDIT. TAS::80 0122::TAS
Place of Performance
Location: ORLANDO, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32899
State: Florida Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $140.8 million to INOMEDIC HEALTH APPLICATIONS, INC. for work described as: MEDICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT CONTRACT (MESC). NOTE: PROCUREMENT IS ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE BUT SYSTEM WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS OPTION. THE CONTRACT HAS FAR 52.223-9 BUT NOT FAR 52.223-4. AWARD CORRECTED TO RECEIVE SUSTAINABILITY CREDIT. TAS::80 0122::TAS Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes contractor performance. 3. The contract duration of 2586 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The procurement aimed for environmentally preferable options, though system limitations were noted. 5. The contract was corrected to receive sustainability credit, highlighting an effort towards environmental goals. 6. The primary service area is Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists).
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this Cost Plus Award Fee contract is challenging without detailed performance metrics and award fee payouts. The raw obligation of over $140 million over approximately seven years suggests a significant investment. However, the lack of specific cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar medical and environmental support contracts makes a definitive value assessment difficult. The inclusion of sustainability credits indicates a potential for long-term cost savings or environmental benefits, but this is not quantified.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that multiple sources were considered after an initial exclusion. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition. While full and open competition is generally preferred, the 'after exclusion of sources' qualifier warrants further investigation into the reasons for the exclusion and whether it limited the competitive landscape.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process, even with exclusions, generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable pricing for taxpayers compared to sole-source awards.
Public Impact
Provides essential medical and environmental support services to NASA personnel. Supports the operational readiness and health of individuals within NASA facilities. The contract's geographic impact is primarily in Florida, where the contractor is located. Likely supports a workforce involved in space exploration and related scientific endeavors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Award Fee contracts if not managed tightly.
- The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition process could have limited the number of viable bidders.
- Environmental preference noted but not fully implemented due to system limitations, raising questions about commitment to sustainability.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through a competitive process, indicating an effort to secure fair pricing.
- Incentivizes contractor performance through the award fee structure.
- Sustainability credits were sought, demonstrating a commitment to environmental considerations.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the healthcare services sector, specifically focusing on physician services and environmental support. The market for such services is substantial, driven by government agencies, healthcare providers, and large corporations requiring specialized medical and environmental management. NASA's need for these services is likely tied to maintaining the health and safety of its personnel and facilities, particularly in specialized environments. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other government contracts for similar medical and environmental support services across various agencies.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this contract, as the 'small business set-aside' field is false. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. This suggests that the prime contractor, Innomedic Health Applications, Inc., is likely a larger entity, and the contract may not significantly contribute to the small business ecosystem unless subcontracting opportunities are actively pursued and reported.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are built into the Cost Plus Award Fee structure, which links contractor compensation to performance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, but detailed performance reviews and award fee determinations are often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Medical Services Contracts
- Environmental Health and Safety Services
- Federal Healthcare Services
- Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
- Cost Plus Award Fee contracts can be susceptible to cost overruns if not managed effectively.
- System limitations hindered the implementation of environmentally preferable procurement options.
Tags
healthcare, medical-services, environmental-support, nasa, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, florida, definitive-contract, long-term-contract, sustainability
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $140.8 million to INOMEDIC HEALTH APPLICATIONS, INC.. MEDICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT CONTRACT (MESC). NOTE: PROCUREMENT IS ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE BUT SYSTEM WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS OPTION. THE CONTRACT HAS FAR 52.223-9 BUT NOT FAR 52.223-4. AWARD CORRECTED TO RECEIVE SUSTAINABILITY CREDIT. TAS::80 0122::TAS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is INOMEDIC HEALTH APPLICATIONS, 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 $140.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-10-01. End: 2015-10-31.
What was the specific reason for excluding certain sources in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' process?
The provided data does not specify the exact reasons for excluding certain sources. Typically, exclusions in federal procurements can occur for various reasons, such as a lack of capability, failure to meet minimum requirements during a pre-qualification phase, or specific regulatory or policy-driven limitations. Understanding the rationale behind these exclusions is crucial for assessing the true level of competition and whether the government secured the best possible value. Without this information, it's difficult to determine if the exclusion process unduly limited competition or was a necessary step to ensure only qualified vendors participated.
How did the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure influence Innomedic Health Applications, Inc.'s performance?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract structure is designed to incentivize contractor performance by allowing the contractor to recover all allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a fixed base fee plus a variable award fee. The award fee is earned based on the government's assessment of the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria. For Innomedic Health Applications, Inc., this means their performance in delivering medical and environmental support services directly impacts the total fee they receive. Higher performance ratings would lead to a larger award fee, while lower ratings would result in a reduced fee. This structure encourages the contractor to go beyond minimum requirements to achieve superior outcomes, thereby aligning the contractor's objectives with the government's desired results.
What are the potential long-term implications of the noted system limitations regarding environmentally preferable procurement options?
The data mentions that the procurement system would not allow for an 'environmentally preferable' option, despite the contract aiming for it. This suggests a potential disconnect between stated environmental goals and the practicalities of the procurement system. The long-term implications could include missed opportunities to reduce environmental impact, potentially higher long-term operational costs if less sustainable options are chosen, and a weakened signal to contractors about the government's commitment to sustainability. While sustainability credits were later awarded, the initial system limitation indicates a need for technological upgrades or policy adjustments within the procurement process to fully support environmentally conscious acquisitions.
How does the $140.8 million obligation compare to similar NASA contracts for medical and environmental support?
Direct comparison of this $140.8 million obligation to similar NASA contracts requires access to a comprehensive database of historical NASA procurements for medical and environmental support. However, as a general benchmark, an obligation of this magnitude over a period of approximately seven years (October 2008 to October 2015) indicates a significant and sustained requirement for these services. It suggests that NASA views these functions as critical to its operations. To provide a more precise comparison, one would need to analyze the scope, duration, and specific services included in other comparable contracts to determine if this represents a high, low, or average expenditure for such support.
What is the significance of the contract being awarded in Florida (ST: FL, SN: FLORIDA)?
The award being associated with Florida (ST: FL, SN: FLORIDA) likely indicates the primary location where the services are performed or where the contractor's relevant facility is based. For NASA, Florida is a key state due to the Kennedy Space Center and other facilities. The presence of a significant contract like this in Florida could imply a substantial need for medical and environmental support services at these installations. It also suggests potential economic benefits for the region through employment and business activity related to the contract. The specific services rendered would be tailored to the needs of NASA's operations within that geographic area.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Health Care and Social Assistance › Offices of Physicians › Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists)
Product/Service Code: MEDICAL SERVICES › GENERAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 2 EATON ST STE 908, HAMPTON, VA, 23669
Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $157,981,974
Exercised Options: $145,544,782
Current Obligation: $140,813,772
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-10-01
Current End Date: 2015-10-31
Potential End Date: 2015-10-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-04-08
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 →