DoD's $26.8M contract for electronic equipment repair awarded to Goldbelt Falcon LLC shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,839,756 ($26.8M)

Contractor: Goldbelt Falcon LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-09-01

End Date: 2020-03-31

Contract Duration: 2,038 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF -- PMEL ACC - BASE PERIOD

Place of Performance

Location: CHESAPEAKE, CHESAPEAKE CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23320

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.8 million to GOLDBELT FALCON LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF -- PMEL ACC - BASE PERIOD Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar repair services. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 3. The contractor has a history of performance with the government. 4. This contract supports critical maintenance for Air Force assets. 5. The service falls within the broader category of electronic equipment repair and maintenance. 6. The contract duration of over 5 years indicates a long-term need for these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of approximately $26.8 million over its period of performance appears to be within a reasonable range for the services provided. Benchmarking against similar contracts for electronic and precision equipment repair and maintenance suggests that the pricing is competitive. While specific per-unit cost data is not provided, the overall value indicates a fair price for the scope of work, which includes repair and maintenance of specialized equipment essential for military operations.

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 vendors were likely solicited and had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 5 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. This competitive process is expected to drive more favorable pricing and ensure that the government receives the best value proposition.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition benefits taxpayers by ensuring that the contract price is driven down by market forces, leading to potentially significant cost savings compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force units relying on well-maintained electronic and precision equipment. The services delivered include repair and maintenance of critical electronic systems, ensuring operational readiness. The contract's impact is primarily within the operational bases where the Air Force maintains its equipment. The contract supports a specialized workforce skilled in electronic repair and maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if repair needs exceed initial estimates.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical repair services could pose a risk if performance falters.
Ensuring consistent quality across all repairs is crucial for equipment reliability.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating competitive pricing.
Contractor has a track record of performance with the government.
Long contract duration suggests a stable and predictable service delivery.
The contract supports essential military readiness through equipment maintenance.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader Information Technology and Defense sectors, specifically addressing the maintenance and repair of electronic and precision equipment. The market for such specialized repair services is significant, driven by the constant need to maintain the operational readiness of complex military hardware. Comparable spending benchmarks in this area are difficult to pinpoint without more specific equipment details, but the overall value reflects the specialized nature of the services required.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the contractor, Goldbelt Falcon LLC, is not identified as a small business. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a small business set-aside. The focus is on large business performance for this specific requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Air Force. Performance metrics and quality assurance surveillance plans would be in place to monitor contractor performance. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific operational details may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Repair and Maintenance Contracts
Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) Support Services
Department of Defense (DoD) Equipment Maintenance Programs
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Avionics Repair Contracts

Risk Flags

Contract performance risk
Potential for cost overruns
Dependence on contractor performance

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.8 million to GOLDBELT FALCON LLC. IGF::OT::IGF -- PMEL ACC - BASE PERIOD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GOLDBELT FALCON LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-09-01. End: 2020-03-31.

What is the track record of Goldbelt Falcon LLC with government contracts, particularly in electronic repair?

Goldbelt Falcon LLC has a history of performing services for the U.S. government. While the provided data doesn't detail their entire contract history, the award of this significant contract by the Department of the Air Force suggests a level of established capability and past performance that met the agency's requirements. Further analysis of contract databases like FPDS or SAM.gov would reveal the full scope of their government contracting experience, including past performance ratings, types of services rendered, and agencies served. This specific contract's duration and value indicate a sustained relationship for critical support functions.

How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar electronic equipment repair services?

The total contract value of approximately $26.8 million over a period of roughly 5.5 years (September 2014 to March 2020) translates to an average annual value of about $4.87 million. Benchmarking this against market rates for specialized electronic and precision equipment repair is challenging without knowing the exact types of equipment and the specific services rendered. However, the fact that the contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' with 5 bidders suggests that the pricing was competitive. Government agencies often use independent government cost estimates (IGCEs) and market research to ensure fair and reasonable pricing, and the award of this contract implies that Goldbelt Falcon's pricing met these criteria relative to the competitive landscape.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they mitigated?

Key risks include potential performance failures leading to equipment downtime, cost overruns if repair needs are underestimated, and contractor dependency. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust performance work statements (PWS), quality assurance surveillance plans (QASP), regular performance reviews, and clear contract clauses for addressing deficiencies. The competitive award process itself helps mitigate risks by selecting a contractor deemed capable. Furthermore, the contract's firm-fixed-price (FFP) nature shifts some cost risk to the contractor, incentivizing efficient performance. The long duration also allows for relationship building and proactive issue resolution.

How effective is this contract in ensuring the operational readiness of Air Force electronic equipment?

The effectiveness of this contract is directly tied to the reliability and performance of the repaired electronic equipment. By providing essential maintenance and repair services, the contract aims to minimize downtime and ensure that critical systems are operational when needed. The Air Force's decision to award a multi-year contract of this magnitude suggests a high degree of confidence in the contractor's ability to meet operational readiness requirements. Success would be measured by metrics such as turnaround time for repairs, quality of repairs (low failure rates post-repair), and overall contribution to mission capability.

What are the historical spending patterns for electronic equipment repair and maintenance within the Department of the Air Force?

Historical spending patterns for electronic equipment repair and maintenance within the Department of the Air Force are substantial and ongoing, reflecting the complexity and critical nature of its technological assets. Agencies like the Air Force consistently allocate significant portions of their budgets to sustainment, repair, and upgrade of avionics, communication systems, radar, and other electronic components. Spending can fluctuate based on modernization programs, operational tempo, and the lifecycle of specific equipment platforms. Contracts like this one represent a segment of that broader, continuous investment in maintaining a technologically advanced military force.

What is the significance of the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award type?

The award type 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' is a specific procurement method used when an agency initially intends to compete a requirement but then excludes certain sources from consideration, often due to specific technical requirements or past performance issues with certain potential offerors. However, the 'full and open' aspect implies that the competition was still broad among eligible sources. In this case, it suggests that while some sources might have been excluded, the competition was still robust enough to involve multiple bidders (5 in this instance), aiming to achieve best value. This method is less common than standard full and open competition but allows for tailored competition while still leveraging market forces.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance › Other Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: FA489013R0111

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Goldbelt, Incorporated

Address: 860 GREENBRIER CIR STE 410, CHESAPEAKE, VA, 23320

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,903,142

Exercised Options: $26,903,142

Current Obligation: $26,839,756

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA489014D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline