Over $264M for SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES by Apogee Engineering, awarded by GSA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $264,642,783 ($264.6M)

Contractor: Apogee Engineering, LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2020-09-17

End Date: 2026-09-16

Contract Duration: 2,190 days

Daily Burn Rate: $120.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH County, FLORIDA, 33621

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $264.6 million to APOGEE ENGINEERING, LLC for work described as: SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value indicates significant long-term support needs for Special Operations Forces. 2. Apogee Engineering, a relatively smaller player, secured a substantial contract, suggesting strong technical capabilities. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. 4. Performance period of nearly 6 years suggests a stable, ongoing requirement. 5. Geographic focus on Florida may indicate a specific operational or training base. 6. The contract's value places it in the upper tier for engineering services within the federal market.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

Benchmarking this contract against similar engineering support services for defense clients is challenging due to the specialized nature of SOF support. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, while common for complex services, carries inherent risks of cost escalation. The fixed fee component provides some predictability, but the cost-reimbursable elements require diligent oversight to ensure value for money. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data, a definitive value assessment is difficult, but the duration and scope suggest a fair market price was likely negotiated.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which implies an initial broad competition followed by a restriction. This suggests that while multiple sources were initially considered, the final award may have been to a limited pool or based on specific qualifications that excluded some potential bidders. The number of bidders (4) is moderate, indicating some level of competition, but the 'exclusion of sources' aspect warrants further investigation into why certain companies were not considered in the final stages.

Taxpayer Impact: A limited competition, even if initially broad, can potentially lead to less aggressive pricing compared to a truly open and unrestricted process. Taxpayers benefit from the initial competition, but the exclusion of sources might have limited the downward pressure on costs.

Public Impact

Special Operations Forces (SOF) personnel benefit from enhanced support services, potentially improving operational readiness and effectiveness. The contract delivers critical engineering and technical support, likely encompassing areas such as logistics, maintenance, and systems integration. The primary geographic impact is in Florida, suggesting support for SOF units or facilities located in that state. The contract may have implications for a specialized workforce in engineering and technical support roles within the defense sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure increases risk of cost overruns without stringent oversight.
Limited competition after exclusion of sources may reduce price discovery and potentially increase costs.
Specialized nature of SOF support makes direct value-for-money comparisons difficult.
Long contract duration requires sustained performance monitoring to ensure continued value.

Positive Signals

Award to Apogee Engineering, a potentially smaller but capable firm, indicates successful market penetration and capability demonstration.
The substantial contract value suggests a recognized need and a well-defined requirement by the agency.
The contract duration provides stability for both the contractor and the supported SOF units.
The fixed fee component offers some level of cost predictability.

Sector Analysis

The federal engineering services market is vast, encompassing a wide range of specialized support for defense, intelligence, and civilian agencies. Contracts like this, supporting Special Operations Forces, often involve highly technical and sensitive requirements. The market is characterized by a mix of large prime contractors and specialized small businesses. Spending benchmarks for similar SOF support services are difficult to ascertain publicly due to classification and proprietary data, but contracts in the tens to hundreds of millions are not uncommon for long-term, complex support requirements.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and Apogee Engineering's status as an 'Other Than Small Business' (based on typical industry classifications for firms winning contracts of this size) means direct small business set-aside benefits are not applicable. However, the contract's size and duration could create significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses if Apogee chooses to utilize them. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on Apogee's subcontracting strategy and the specific areas where they seek specialized support.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA) and the specific program office within the Department of Defense utilizing the support services. Accountability measures are embedded in the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, requiring detailed cost reporting and justification. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance details and cost breakdowns may be limited due to security or proprietary concerns. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Special Operations Forces Support Services
Defense Engineering Services
Logistics and Technical Support Contracts
General Services Administration Contracts
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure requires robust oversight to prevent cost overruns.
Limited competition after source exclusion may impact price discovery.
Specialized nature of SOF support makes direct benchmarking difficult.
Long-term contract duration necessitates continuous performance monitoring.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $264.6 million to APOGEE ENGINEERING, LLC. SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is APOGEE ENGINEERING, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $264.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-17. End: 2026-09-16.

What is Apogee Engineering's track record with similar large-scale federal contracts, particularly within the defense sector?

Apogee Engineering, LLC has a history of securing federal contracts, primarily within the defense and aerospace sectors. While this specific contract for SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES is substantial, the company has experience with various government agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their portfolio often includes engineering, technical, and program management services. Analyzing their past performance on similar cost-plus contracts would be crucial to assess their ability to manage costs effectively and deliver on complex requirements. A review of past performance evaluations and any contract modifications or disputes would provide further insight into their reliability and capability in handling large, long-term engagements.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure compare to other contract types for similar services, and what are the associated risks?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure is common for research and development, complex services, or situations where the scope is not fully defined at the outset. It allows the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers more flexibility for the government if requirements change, but it shifts more cost risk to the government. The primary risk is cost overrun, as the contractor is incentivized to incur costs to ensure recovery, and the fixed fee doesn't increase with costs. Effective oversight, detailed cost monitoring, and clear performance metrics are essential to mitigate these risks and ensure value for money.

What specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are likely being used to evaluate Apogee Engineering's success under this contract?

While specific KPIs are not publicly disclosed, contracts for SOF support services typically focus on metrics related to operational readiness, system availability, response times for technical support, successful project completion within defined parameters, and adherence to safety and security protocols. For engineering services, KPIs might include the accuracy and timeliness of design submissions, the effectiveness of implemented solutions, and the efficiency of maintenance or logistical support provided. Given the CPFF structure, metrics related to cost control and efficient resource utilization would also be critical. The agency's program management office would be responsible for defining and monitoring these KPIs throughout the contract's duration.

What is the historical spending trend for SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES or similar categories by the General Services Administration (GSA) or the Department of Defense?

Historical spending on SOF support services and related engineering categories by the Department of Defense (DoD) has generally trended upwards, reflecting increasing global security challenges and the need for advanced technological and logistical support for special operations. GSA, as an awarding agency in this case, facilitates procurement but the ultimate funding and requirement originate from DoD components. Analyzing specific spending trends for 'SOF ATL SUPPORT SERVICES' is difficult without a precise contract line item number or category code. However, broader categories like 'Engineering Services' or 'Logistics Support' within the defense sector show consistent, significant federal investment, often in the billions annually, driven by evolving mission requirements and technological advancements.

What are the potential implications of the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award type on overall contract value and innovation?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' (FOUCAES) award type suggests an initial broad solicitation followed by a restriction, possibly due to specific technical requirements, past performance, or socioeconomic factors that led to excluding certain offerors from the final competition. While it aims to leverage initial competition, the subsequent exclusion can limit the pool of potential awardees. This might reduce the intensity of price competition compared to a truly unrestricted full and open process. The impact on innovation is mixed; it could foster innovation if the excluded sources lacked the specific capabilities needed, or it could stifle it if the exclusion was arbitrary and prevented potentially more innovative solutions from being considered. The rationale behind the exclusion is key to understanding its full impact.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 47QFSA20Q0028

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 8610 EXPLORER DRIVE, SUITE 305, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, 80920

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $436,106,866

Exercised Options: $284,103,253

Current Obligation: $264,642,783

Actual Outlays: $-1,239,761

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 6

Total Subaward Amount: $91,273,392

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADS133

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline