Interior Department's $28M Facilities Condition Assessment Contract Awarded to Cooper Zietz Engineers

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,955,463 ($28.0M)

Contractor: Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2020-09-30

End Date: 2025-11-29

Contract Duration: 1,886 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: PORTLAND, CLACKAMAS County, OREGON, 97222

State: Oregon Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $28.0 million to COOPER ZIETZ ENGINEERS, INC. for work described as: FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value of $27.96 million over approximately 5 years. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The contractor, Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc., has a track record with federal contracts. 5. Services fall under Administrative Management and General Management Consulting. 6. The contract duration is 1886 days, spanning from September 2020 to November 2025. 7. The contract was awarded after exclusion of sources, suggesting a specific justification for the procurement approach. 8. The contract is a definitive contract, typically used for services or supplies over a period of time.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $28 million over five years for facilities condition assessment services appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale assessment contracts is difficult without more specific service details, but the firm-fixed-price structure suggests the government has negotiated a set price, mitigating potential cost overruns. The number of bidders (7) also suggests a healthy level of competition that likely contributed to a fair price.

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.' While the 'full and open' aspect indicates a broad solicitation, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause suggests that certain potential sources were intentionally not considered, likely due to specific technical requirements or prior performance. Seven bids were received, demonstrating a competitive environment that should have driven price discovery and offered the government a range of options.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of the bidding process, despite the exclusion of some sources, likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source award. The multiple bids allowed for comparison and negotiation, ensuring the government received value for its investment.

Public Impact

The Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education are the primary beneficiaries, receiving critical assessments of their facilities. Services include comprehensive evaluations of building conditions, identifying maintenance needs and potential hazards. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, covering facilities managed by the BIA and BIE across various tribal lands and educational institutions. The contract supports the operational readiness and safety of educational and administrative facilities serving Native American communities. Workforce implications include the direct employment of engineers and consultants by Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation to ensure it was fully justified and did not unduly limit competition.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's performance quality beyond price.
The long contract duration could present challenges in adapting to evolving facility needs or technological advancements in assessment methods.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm Fixed Price contract type transfers cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The contractor, Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc., has experience with federal contracts, suggesting familiarity with government requirements.
The contract supports critical infrastructure assessments for educational and tribal facilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically management consulting. The market for facilities condition assessment is significant, driven by the need for agencies to maintain aging infrastructure, comply with regulations, and plan for capital investments. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large federal contracts for similar assessment services across agencies like GSA, DOD, or other departments with extensive real property portfolios.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside requirement. Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc. may choose to subcontract portions of the work, but this is not mandated by the contract's structure as presented.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically reside with the contracting officer and program managers within the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education. As a definitive contract, it likely includes reporting requirements and performance standards. Transparency is facilitated by contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is publicly available. Specific Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on the agency's IG mandate and any potential fraud, waste, or abuse identified.

Related Government Programs

Federal Buildings Fund
Public Buildings Service (GSA)
Department of Defense Facilities Management
General Services Administration (GSA) Contracts
Bureau of Indian Affairs Operations
Bureau of Indian Education Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for outdated assessments due to long contract duration.
Justification for 'exclusion of sources' requires scrutiny.
Performance quality assessment is limited without specific metrics.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $28.0 million to COOPER ZIETZ ENGINEERS, INC.. FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COOPER ZIETZ ENGINEERS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $28.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-30. End: 2025-11-29.

What is the specific justification for the 'exclusion of sources' in this 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' (F&OCAESO) designation implies that while the solicitation was broadly advertised, certain potential offerors were intentionally excluded from consideration. This exclusion typically occurs when specific technical capabilities, unique past performance requirements, or proprietary information necessitate limiting the pool of eligible bidders. For this contract, the justification would likely stem from highly specialized assessment methodologies, specific software or equipment requirements, or a need for contractors with demonstrated experience on unique types of facilities managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education. Without access to the contract's Justification and Approval (J&A) document, the precise reasons remain speculative, but it suggests a deliberate effort to ensure the selected contractor possessed particular, non-generic qualifications deemed essential for the project's success.

How does the $27.96 million contract value compare to similar facilities condition assessment contracts awarded by federal agencies?

Directly comparing the $27.96 million value of this contract to similar facilities condition assessment (FCA) contracts is challenging without detailed scope and duration information for comparable awards. However, the value suggests a large-scale, multi-year engagement covering a significant portfolio of facilities. Federal agencies often award multi-million dollar contracts for comprehensive FCA services, particularly those managing extensive or aging infrastructure like the Department of Defense, General Services Administration (GSA), or the Department of Veterans Affairs. The price per facility or per square foot would be a more granular metric for comparison, but this data is not provided. Given the 5-year duration and the broad mandate of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education, the contract value appears to be within a reasonable range for such a significant undertaking.

What are the potential risks associated with a 1886-day (over 5 years) contract for facilities condition assessments?

A contract duration of over five years for facilities condition assessments presents several potential risks. Firstly, the condition of facilities can change significantly over such a period due to wear and tear, environmental factors, or usage patterns, potentially rendering initial assessments outdated before the contract's end. Secondly, technological advancements in assessment tools and methodologies may emerge, making the contractor's initial approach less efficient or comprehensive over time. Thirdly, there's a risk of 'contractor fatigue' or a decline in the contractor's focus and quality of work as the contract matures, especially if performance monitoring is not rigorous. Finally, market conditions and pricing for related services could fluctuate, potentially making the fixed price less advantageous for the government towards the end of the contract term if market rates increase substantially.

What is the track record of Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc. with federal contracts, and does it indicate a propensity for successful performance?

Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc. has a history of receiving federal contracts, as indicated by its presence in federal procurement databases. While the provided data does not detail the specific nature or success rate of their past federal awards, the fact that they were awarded this significant contract suggests they met the government's pre-qualification criteria, which often include financial stability, technical expertise, and relevant past performance. A deeper analysis would involve reviewing their contract history for performance ratings, any past disputes or terminations, and the types of services previously rendered to federal agencies. However, securing a multi-million dollar, long-term contract like this generally implies a level of demonstrated capability and reliability.

How does the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type impact cost control and risk for this facilities assessment service?

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type is generally considered advantageous for the government in managing costs and risk, especially for services with well-defined scopes, such as facilities condition assessments. Under an FFP agreement, the contractor, Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc., is obligated to complete the work for a predetermined price, regardless of their actual costs incurred. This shifts the financial risk of cost overruns entirely to the contractor. Consequently, the government benefits from cost certainty and is protected from unexpected increases in labor, material, or overhead expenses. The contractor is incentivized to manage their resources efficiently to maximize profit, which can lead to cost savings for the government if the contractor is highly efficient. However, the government must ensure the scope is clearly defined upfront to avoid change orders that could negate the FFP benefits.

What is the significance of the NAICS code 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services) for this contract?

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611, 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services,' categorizes the primary business activity of the contractor for this award. This code signifies that Cooper Zietz Engineers, Inc. is providing expertise and advice related to the management and operational aspects of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education's facilities. While the specific service is 'Facilities Condition Assessment,' it falls under the broader umbrella of management consulting because it involves analyzing the state of assets, identifying issues, and recommending strategic approaches for maintenance, repair, and capital planning. This classification helps in understanding the nature of the services procured and allows for comparison with other contracts within the management consulting sector.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 140A1620R0038

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 6400 SE LAKE RD STE 270, PORTLAND, OR, 97222

Business Categories: American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $27,955,463

Exercised Options: $27,955,463

Current Obligation: $27,955,463

Actual Outlays: $27,718,822

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline