NASA's $817M Facilities Support Contract Awarded to SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC Under Full and Open Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $817,488,873 ($817.5M)
Contractor: Syncom Space Services LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2016-02-01
End Date: 2025-06-30
Contract Duration: 3,437 days
Daily Burn Rate: $237.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF SYNERGY-ACHIEVING CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE - INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY
Place of Performance
Location: STENNIS SPACE CENTER, HANCOCK County, MISSISSIPPI, 39529
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $817.5 million to SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF SYNERGY-ACHIEVING CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE - INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY Key points: 1. The contract aims to achieve consolidated operations and maintenance for facilities. 2. It is a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) type contract, allowing for performance-based adjustments. 3. The contract has a long duration, spanning from February 2016 to June 2025. 4. The awarded amount of $817.49 million represents significant investment in facility support. 5. The contract is managed by NASA's National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561210 indicates a focus on facilities support services.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
Benchmarking the value of this contract requires detailed comparison with similar facilities support contracts across federal agencies. The CPIF structure suggests an attempt to incentivize efficiency, but the total obligated amount over its lifespan needs to be assessed against performance metrics and potential cost savings achieved through consolidation. Without specific performance data or comparable contract details, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the structure indicates a focus on achieving better outcomes through shared incentives.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to more favorable pricing and innovative solutions for the government. The agency's commitment to full and open competition suggests a thorough evaluation process to select the most capable and cost-effective provider.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through the potential for lower prices and higher quality services due to a robust bidding process. This approach ensures that public funds are used efficiently by leveraging market forces to drive value.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA facilities and personnel who will receive consolidated and potentially improved operations and maintenance services. Services delivered include a wide range of facility support, aiming for operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness. The geographic impact is concentrated at NASA facilities within Mississippi, where SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC is based. Workforce implications may include the creation or reallocation of jobs related to facility management and maintenance under SYNCOM's purview.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long contract duration could lead to complacency if not actively managed.
- CPIF contracts require careful monitoring of incentive structures to ensure they align with government objectives.
- Consolidation of operations might lead to unforeseen integration challenges.
- Reliance on a single contractor for critical facility support could pose risks if performance degrades.
Positive Signals
- Full and open competition suggests a strong initial selection process.
- CPIF structure incentivizes contractor performance and cost control.
- Consolidation aims for operational efficiencies and potential cost savings.
- Long-term contract provides stability for service delivery.
Sector Analysis
Facilities Support Services, categorized under NAICS code 561210, is a significant sector within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This contract represents a substantial portion of spending within this niche, focusing on the comprehensive management and maintenance of government facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale federal contracts for facility operations and maintenance, often awarded to large, specialized service providers.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary contractor, SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC, is likely a larger entity. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this data, which warrants further investigation to understand the potential impact on the small business ecosystem and opportunities for subcontracting.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract is primarily managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract, performance metrics and cost controls are crucial areas of oversight. Transparency would be assessed through contract reporting requirements and any public disclosures made by NASA regarding the contract's progress and outcomes. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically fall under NASA's OIG for any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Facilities Operations and Maintenance Contracts
- Federal Facilities Support Services
- Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contracts
- Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contracts
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration
- Potential for cost overruns in CPIF structure
- Reliance on single contractor for critical services
- Need for robust performance monitoring
Tags
nasa, facilities-support-services, cost-plus-incentive-fee, indefinite-delivery-indefinite-quantity, full-and-open-competition, mississippi, large-contract, service-contract, operations-and-maintenance, federal-agency
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $817.5 million to SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC. IGF::OT::IGF SYNERGY-ACHIEVING CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE - INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SYNCOM SPACE 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 $817.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2016-02-01. End: 2025-06-30.
What is the historical spending pattern for facilities support services at NASA, and how does this contract compare?
Historical spending on facilities support services at NASA can vary significantly year-to-year based on infrastructure needs, research priorities, and specific facility upgrades or closures. This $817.49 million contract, spanning nearly a decade, represents a substantial and consistent investment in maintaining NASA's operational capabilities. To compare, one would need to analyze NASA's budget allocations for facilities management over the past decade, looking at both direct spending and the value of similar large-scale support contracts. A contract of this magnitude suggests a strategic decision to consolidate and manage a significant portion of NASA's facility needs under a single, long-term agreement, potentially aiming for economies of scale and streamlined operations compared to fragmented, shorter-term contracts.
How effectively has SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC managed similar large-scale federal contracts in the past?
Assessing SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC's track record requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving facilities support and large IDIQ vehicles. Information on contract performance ratings, any past disputes or contract modifications, and successful delivery of services would be crucial. Without access to specific performance data or past performance evaluations (like Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), it's difficult to definitively state their effectiveness. However, being awarded a contract of this size and scope by NASA suggests they likely met stringent pre-qualification criteria and demonstrated a capacity to handle complex facility management requirements.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and incentive structures within this CPIF contract, and how are they monitored?
The specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and incentive structures for this Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract are not detailed in the provided data. Typically, CPIF contracts link a portion of the contractor's profit to achieving specific performance targets, such as cost savings, schedule adherence, quality standards, or operational efficiency metrics. NASA would establish these KPIs in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Work Statement (PWS). Monitoring would involve regular performance reviews, data collection on the KPIs, and audits to verify contractor performance against the agreed-upon metrics. The incentive fee would then be adjusted based on this performance, rewarding the contractor for exceeding targets and potentially reducing profit for underperformance.
What is the projected cost savings or value-for-money achieved through the consolidation of operations under this contract?
The projected cost savings or value-for-money from consolidating operations under this contract are not explicitly quantified in the provided data. The rationale for consolidation typically centers on achieving economies of scale, reducing redundant overhead, standardizing processes, and improving overall efficiency. NASA likely conducted an analysis during the procurement phase to estimate these benefits. Realizing these savings depends on effective implementation by SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC and diligent oversight by NASA. Ongoing performance monitoring and post-contract analysis would be necessary to definitively measure the actual cost savings and overall value delivered compared to the previous, potentially fragmented, approach to facility support.
Are there any identified risks associated with this contract, such as contractor performance, cost overruns, or security vulnerabilities?
Potential risks associated with this contract include standard concerns for large, long-term federal service contracts. Contractor performance is always a risk; if SYNCOM SPACE SERVICES LLC fails to meet its obligations, it could disrupt NASA's operations. Cost overruns are a possibility, especially in CPIF contracts, although the incentive structure aims to mitigate this. The long duration (2016-2025) increases the potential for unforeseen challenges or changes in requirements. Security vulnerabilities related to facility access, data management (if applicable), and physical security of NASA assets are also inherent risks that require robust mitigation strategies and continuous monitoring by both the contractor and NASA.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Pae-Parsons Global Logistics Services, LLC
Address: 1320 N COURTHOUSE RD STE 700, ARLINGTON, VA, 22201
Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $845,758,483
Exercised Options: $845,758,483
Current Obligation: $817,488,873
Actual Outlays: $525,681,523
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 939
Total Subaward Amount: $244,039,374
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNS15AA01C
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2016-02-01
Current End Date: 2025-06-30
Potential End Date: 2025-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-24
More Contracts from Syncom Space Services LLC
- Synergy-Achieving Consolidated Operations and Maintenance, Cost Plus Incentive FEE, Core Work — $391.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Synergy-Achieving Consolidated Operations and Maintenance, Firm Fixed Price, Core Work — $120.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Synergy-Achieving Consolidated Operations and Maintenance, Cost Plus Incentive FEE - Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity — $108.3M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Synergy - Achieving Consilidated Operations and Maintenance (sacom) — $100.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Synergy-Achieving Consolidated Operations and Maintenance, Firm Fixed Price-Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity — $20.4M (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 →