DoD's $50M task order to KBR Services for facilities support shows a 2007 award with a 2013 completion date
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $876,891,940 ($876.9M)
Contractor: KBR Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2007-06-06
End Date: 2013-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,308 days
Daily Burn Rate: $379.9K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: TASK ORDER AWARD FOR THE IZ. FUNDING $50,000,000.00
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $876.9 million to KBR SERVICES, LLC for work described as: TASK ORDER AWARD FOR THE IZ. FUNDING $50,000,000.00 Key points: 1. The contract's duration of over 6 years suggests a long-term need for facilities support services. 2. Awarded in 2007, the contract predates many modern procurement reforms, potentially impacting its value. 3. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure incentivizes performance but can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly. 4. Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a broad category, making direct cost comparisons challenging without specific service details. 5. The contract's total value of $50,000,000.00 over its period of performance needs to be assessed against the scope of work. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates this was not specifically targeted for small business participation.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Assessing the value for money on this 2007 award is challenging without detailed performance metrics and a clear understanding of the services rendered. The CPAF contract type allows for cost plus profit and an award fee based on performance, which can be effective but also carries a risk of cost overruns if performance targets are not well-defined or if oversight is lacking. Benchmarking against similar facilities support contracts awarded around the same period would be necessary for a more precise value assessment, but the broad nature of 'Facilities Support Services' complicates direct comparisons.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This competitive process is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a robust competition was intended and likely achieved, which should have driven down costs compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to better pricing and service quality, maximizing the value of federal dollars spent.
Public Impact
The Department of Defense benefits from the provision of essential facilities support services, ensuring operational readiness. Services likely include maintenance, repair, and management of various facilities critical to military operations. The geographic impact is tied to the specific military installations where KBR Services performed its duties. The contract supports a workforce involved in facilities management, maintenance, and related support roles.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost creep under the Cost Plus Award Fee structure if performance metrics are not rigorously managed.
- The long performance period (over 6 years) could lead to outdated service delivery models if not actively managed and updated.
- Lack of specific details on the scope of 'Facilities Support Services' makes it difficult to fully assess performance and value.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process that should have yielded favorable terms.
- The Cost Plus Award Fee structure, if managed effectively, can incentivize high performance and quality service delivery.
- The contract's duration indicates a sustained need and potentially a successful track record in fulfilling those needs.
Sector Analysis
Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a significant sector within government contracting, encompassing a wide range of services from building operations and maintenance to groundskeeping and custodial services. Federal spending in this area is substantial, supporting the infrastructure of numerous government agencies and military installations. This contract fits within the broader category of base operations and support services, which are critical for maintaining the functionality and readiness of federal facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend heavily on the specific services provided and the scale of the facilities supported.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside (ss: false, sb: false). This means that the competition was open to all eligible businesses, including large corporations. While this ensures broad competition, it also means that specific opportunities for small businesses to participate directly as the prime contractor were not prioritized for this particular award. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may have existed, but this information is not detailed in the provided data.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting command. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure necessitates robust oversight to ensure that costs are reasonable and that performance meets or exceeds award fee criteria. Transparency would be enhanced through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though detailed performance reviews are often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Base Operations Support Services
- Facilities Maintenance and Repair Contracts
- Logistics and Support Services
- Department of Defense Construction and Facilities Management
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
- Risk of outdated service models given the contract's duration.
- Difficulty in benchmarking value without specific service details.
Tags
department-of-defense, facilities-support-services, kbr-services-llc, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, task-order, army, long-term-contract, service-contract, federal-spending
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $876.9 million to KBR SERVICES, LLC. TASK ORDER AWARD FOR THE IZ. FUNDING $50,000,000.00
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is KBR SERVICES, LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $876.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-06-06. End: 2013-09-30.
What specific facilities support services were included under this $50 million task order?
The provided data classifies this contract under NAICS code 561210, 'Facilities Support Services.' This is a broad category that can encompass a wide array of services including, but not limited to, operation and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure, grounds maintenance, custodial services, pest control, refuse collection, security systems maintenance, and energy management. Without further details on the specific task order statement of work, it is impossible to ascertain the precise services rendered. However, given the Department of Defense context, these services were likely critical for maintaining the operational readiness and functionality of military installations.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure typically impact contract costs and performance for the Department of Defense?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type allows the contractor to recover all allowable costs incurred, plus a fixed fee that is subject to an award amount based on performance against pre-defined criteria. For the Department of Defense, CPAF is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or when performance incentives are crucial. While it can motivate contractors to exceed performance expectations and deliver high-quality services, it also carries a risk of higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts if the award fee criteria are not stringent or if costs are not meticulously managed. Effective oversight is paramount to ensure that the government pays fairly for achieved performance and that costs remain reasonable.
What is the significance of the contract being awarded in 2007 and expiring in 2013?
An award in 2007 with a completion date in 2013 signifies a performance period of approximately six years. This duration suggests a long-term requirement for the facilities support services provided. Contracts awarded during this period might reflect procurement practices and economic conditions prevalent at that time. Assessing its value requires considering the technological and operational standards of the mid-2000s to early 2010s. Furthermore, the length of the contract could indicate a stable relationship between the DoD and KBR Services, LLC, potentially stemming from consistent performance, though it also necessitates periodic reviews to ensure continued relevance and cost-effectiveness.
How does the 'full and open competition' designation influence the potential value for taxpayers?
The designation 'full and open competition' means that the contract was solicited from all eligible responsible sources, and any responsible source was permitted to submit a bid. This is generally considered the most effective method for achieving competitive pricing and ensuring the government obtains the best value. By allowing a wide range of potential bidders to compete, the government can leverage market forces to drive down costs and encourage innovation. For taxpayers, this translates to a higher likelihood that their money is being spent efficiently, as the competitive process should theoretically lead to lower prices and higher quality services compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.
What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration facilities support contract like this one?
Long-duration contracts, such as this six-year task order, present several potential risks. Firstly, the scope of work or the technology used might become outdated over time, leading to inefficiencies or the need for costly modifications. Secondly, the cost structure, especially under a CPAF arrangement, needs continuous monitoring to prevent cost escalation beyond initial projections. Thirdly, a prolonged relationship without robust oversight could lead to complacency on either the contractor's or the government's part. Finally, market conditions and pricing for services can change significantly over six years, potentially making the original pricing less competitive if not adjusted through contract modifications or re-competition.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: KBR, Inc.
Address: 601 JEFFERSON ST, HOUSTON, TX, 77002
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $876,891,940
Exercised Options: $876,891,940
Current Obligation: $876,891,940
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: DAAA0902D0007
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-06-06
Current End Date: 2013-09-30
Potential End Date: 2013-09-30 12:09:00
Last Modified: 2022-04-02
More Contracts from KBR Services, LLC
- Follow on Task Order to 139 IS NOW Task Order 159 — $8.9B (Department of Defense)
- 200612!001884!2100!w52p1j!u.s. Army Industrial Operations !daaa0902d0007 !A!N! !Y!0139 ! !20060822!20120131!133469119!133469119!964409007!n!kellogg Brown&root Services,!4100 Clinton DRY !houston !TX!77020!00000! !IZ! ! !iraq !+000400000000!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !S1 !services !000 !NOT Discernable !561210!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!u!r!2!003!b! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $7.9B (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $6.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200509!001151!2100!w52p1j!u.s. Army Industrial Operations !daaa0902d0007 !A!N! !Y!0089 ! !20050613!20120131!133469119!133469119!964409007!n!kellogg Brown&root Services,!4100 Clinton DR !houston !TX!77020!00000! !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000135000000!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !S1 !services !000 !* !561210!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!u!r!2!003!b! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! !Y! ! ! !0001! ! — $4.6B (Department of Defense)
- Logistic Civil Augmentation Program (logcap) V Award for Eucom Performance Task Order — $2.2B (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)