USDA awards $681K for building maintenance, raising questions on competition and value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $68,135 ($68.1K)

Contractor: Johnson Controls, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Agriculture

Start Date: 2023-12-06

End Date: 2025-03-05

Contract Duration: 455 days

Daily Burn Rate: $150/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: BLDG 1 CHILLER AND CONTROLS SERVICE CONTRACT RENEWAL/LSS

Place of Performance

Location: STONEVILLE, WASHINGTON County, MISSISSIPPI, 38776

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Agriculture obligated $68,134.97 to JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC for work described as: BLDG 1 CHILLER AND CONTROLS SERVICE CONTRACT RENEWAL/LSS Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a non-competitive basis, limiting price discovery. 2. Duration of 455 days for a service contract requires scrutiny. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type offers cost certainty but may not reflect market fluctuations. 4. Focus on facilities support services indicates essential operational needs. 5. Geographic focus on Mississippi for building maintenance. 6. Potential for cost savings through competitive bidding in future procurements.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $681,349.97 for a chiller and controls service contract renewal appears moderate for a federal facility. However, without competitive bidding, it is difficult to benchmark the pricing against market rates or similar contracts. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost predictability for the agency, but it may not guarantee the best value if the awarded price exceeds what could have been achieved through competition. Further analysis of the specific services rendered and their necessity would be required for a more definitive value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a 'NOT COMPETED' method, indicating a sole-source or limited competition procurement. The specific justification for this approach is not provided in the data. A lack of competition means that only one vendor, Johnson Controls, Inc., was considered, preventing the agency from exploring offers from other qualified providers. This can lead to higher prices and potentially less innovation compared to an open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bids, there's no guarantee that the price reflects the most economical option available in the market.

Public Impact

The Agricultural Research Service benefits from the continued maintenance of critical building infrastructure. Essential services for chiller and controls systems ensure operational continuity. The geographic impact is localized to facilities in Mississippi. Workforce implications are likely internal to the contractor, Johnson Controls, Inc.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated pricing.
Non-competitive award limits opportunities for other service providers.
Contract duration without competition warrants scrutiny for potential overruns.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract provides budget certainty.
Service contract ensures continued operation of essential building systems.
Award to an established vendor may ensure continuity of service.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services, categorized under NAICS code 561210, is a broad sector encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and other facilities. This contract for chiller and controls service renewal falls within this essential sector. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services across numerous agencies and installations. Benchmarking this specific contract's value is challenging without competitive data, but the overall market for facilities management is substantial, with numerous private sector providers.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not awarded to a small business (sb: false) and was not a small business set-aside (ss: false). Therefore, this specific award does not directly benefit small businesses through set-aside provisions. However, the prime contractor, Johnson Controls, Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors, though this information is not detailed in the provided data. The lack of competition also means fewer opportunities for small businesses to bid on this particular contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Agricultural Research Service within the Department of Agriculture. As a Purchase Order, it is subject to standard procurement regulations and agency oversight. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature of the award. Specific accountability measures would be detailed in the contract terms, but the absence of competition makes assessing performance against market alternatives difficult. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Maintenance Contracts
HVAC Service Contracts
Government Facilities Management
Department of Agriculture Procurement

Risk Flags

Non-competitive award
Potential for inflated pricing
Limited transparency in procurement

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Agriculture awarded $68,134.97 to JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC. BLDG 1 CHILLER AND CONTROLS SERVICE CONTRACT RENEWAL/LSS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Agriculture (Agricultural Research Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $68,134.97.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-12-06. End: 2025-03-05.

What is the track record of Johnson Controls, Inc. with the federal government?

Johnson Controls, Inc. has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily for facilities maintenance, HVAC systems, and building automation. Their federal award data typically shows a mix of competitive and non-competitive awards across various agencies. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, including contract values, durations, and any reported issues or successes, would provide context for this specific award. A review of contract close-out data and any past performance evaluations would be crucial to understanding their reliability and effectiveness as a federal contractor. Without specific historical data points for this analysis, it's assumed they are a capable provider based on their market presence.

How does the cost of this contract compare to similar federal contracts for chiller and controls services?

Direct comparison of the cost for this $681,349.97 contract is challenging due to its non-competitive nature. Typically, federal agencies benchmark such contracts against historical awards for similar services, considering factors like facility size, system complexity, geographic location, and contract duration. In a competitive environment, multiple bids would provide a clear market price. Since this was not competed, the agency may have relied on internal cost estimates or historical pricing from the incumbent contractor. To assess value, one would need to compare the proposed services and pricing against publicly available data for similar federal contracts awarded competitively, adjusting for relevant variables. The absence of competitive bids makes a definitive value-for-money assessment difficult.

What are the primary risks associated with a non-competitively awarded service contract?

The primary risks associated with a non-competitively awarded service contract include potential overpayment, reduced service quality, and lack of innovation. Without competition, the contractor faces less pressure to offer the lowest possible price, potentially leading to inflated costs for taxpayers. The absence of multiple bidders also means the agency may not be aware of alternative solutions or more cost-effective technologies. Furthermore, a sole-source award can create vendor lock-in, making it difficult to switch providers in the future even if performance is unsatisfactory. There's also a risk that the scope of work might not be as optimized as it could be under competitive scrutiny, potentially leading to inefficiencies.

What is the expected effectiveness of the services provided under this contract?

The expected effectiveness of the services under this contract hinges on the continued proper functioning of the building's chiller and control systems. These systems are critical for maintaining appropriate environmental conditions within the facility, impacting everything from equipment longevity to occupant comfort and safety. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests a defined scope of work, aiming for predictable outcomes. Effectiveness will be measured by the reliability of the systems post-service, the prevention of unexpected breakdowns, and adherence to the specified maintenance schedule. The Agricultural Research Service anticipates that these services will ensure the operational continuity and efficiency of their Mississippi facilities.

What are the historical spending patterns for facilities support services at this specific USDA facility or within the Agricultural Research Service?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for facilities support services at this specific USDA facility or within the Agricultural Research Service would provide crucial context for this $681,349.97 contract. This would involve examining past contract awards for similar services (HVAC, chiller maintenance, controls) over several fiscal years. Key metrics to review include the total amount spent annually, the number of contracts awarded, the types of services procured, and whether these were competed or sole-sourced. Understanding trends in spending, price increases or decreases over time, and the prevalence of non-competitive awards can highlight potential areas for cost savings or identify systemic issues in procurement strategies. Without access to this specific historical data, it's impossible to provide a detailed pattern.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 12405B24Q0022

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Johnson Controls Fire Protection LP

Address: 507 E MICHIGAN ST, MILWAUKEE, WI, 53202

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Foreign Owned, Foreign-Owned and U.S.-Incorporated Business, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $68,135

Exercised Options: $68,135

Current Obligation: $68,135

Actual Outlays: $53,235

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline