DOT awards $877K for elevator inspections in MN, with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $87,679 ($87.7K)

Contractor: Reliant Elevator Inspections & Consulting, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2023-06-28

End Date: 2028-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,738 days

Daily Burn Rate: $50/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ELEVATOR INSPECTION AND TESTING - MIN/MSP DISTRICT

Place of Performance

Location: FARMINGTON, DAKOTA County, MINNESOTA, 55024

State: Minnesota Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $87,679 to RELIANT ELEVATOR INSPECTIONS & CONSULTING, INC. for work described as: ELEVATOR INSPECTION AND TESTING - MIN/MSP DISTRICT Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for specialized inspection services. 2. Limited competition raises questions about optimal pricing and innovation. 3. Contract duration suggests a need for ongoing, consistent oversight. 4. Services are critical for safety and regulatory compliance. 5. Geographic focus on Minnesota is clearly defined. 6. Contract type is firm fixed price, offering cost certainty.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $876,790 over approximately 4.8 years for elevator inspection and testing services in the Minneapolis/St. Paul district seems within a reasonable range for specialized technical services. Benchmarking against similar federal contracts for building inspection services is challenging without more granular data on scope and location. However, the firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government. The absence of a specific dollar amount for the base period or options makes a precise value-for-money assessment difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded on a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' basis, indicating limited competition. This suggests that either only one source was capable of meeting the requirement, or there were specific circumstances that precluded a broader solicitation. The limited number of bidders (implied to be one, given the award type) may lead to higher prices than if there were robust competition, as the contractor faces less pressure to offer the most competitive rates.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can result in taxpayers paying a premium for services, as the government may not benefit from the cost savings typically driven by a competitive bidding process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the traveling public and airport personnel who rely on safe elevator operations. Services ensure compliance with safety regulations for elevators within the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) district. The geographic impact is concentrated within the MSP airport area. The contract supports specialized technical jobs in elevator inspection and consulting.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may result in higher costs for taxpayers.
Lack of transparency in the 'not available for competition' justification.
Potential for vendor lock-in due to specialized nature of services.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides budget predictability.
Long-term contract ensures continuity of essential safety services.
Focus on a specific geographic area allows for specialized expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on building inspection services. The market for specialized elevator inspection and testing is relatively niche, often requiring certified professionals and adherence to strict safety codes. Federal spending in this area is typically driven by the need to maintain safety and compliance across government-owned or operated facilities, including airports. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without detailed scope information, but the contract value suggests a significant operational requirement.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside requirement for this award (ss: false, sb: false). There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific contract is likely minimal, unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for specialized support.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contract administration office within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), a division of the Department of Transportation. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability for the contractor to deliver services within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency is limited by the 'not available for competition' award justification. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Aviation Administration Facility Maintenance
General Services Administration Building Operations
Department of Transportation Airport Safety Programs
Federal Building Inspection Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition
Lack of detailed performance metrics
Unclear justification for sole-source award

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $87,679 to RELIANT ELEVATOR INSPECTIONS & CONSULTING, INC.. ELEVATOR INSPECTION AND TESTING - MIN/MSP DISTRICT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RELIANT ELEVATOR INSPECTIONS & CONSULTING, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $87,679.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-06-28. End: 2028-03-31.

What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a 'not available for competition' basis?

The provided data states the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'. This typically implies that only one responsible source was determined to be capable of satisfying the agency's needs, or that a compelling justification, such as urgency, unique capabilities, or a lack of other sources, was approved. Without further documentation from the agency (e.g., a Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition - JOFOC), the precise reason remains unclear. This lack of transparency can be a concern for ensuring fair market access and potentially optimal pricing for the government.

How does the contract value compare to similar elevator inspection services procured by the government or private sector?

Direct comparison of the $876,790 contract value is difficult without detailed scope, duration, and location specifics for comparable contracts. However, for a multi-year contract covering a significant district like MSP, this value appears to be in a moderate range for specialized technical services. Private sector rates can vary widely based on the type of elevator, inspection frequency, and local market conditions. Federal contracts often include administrative overhead and compliance requirements that can influence pricing. A more robust comparison would require access to detailed contract line item data and market research reports.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this contract?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for this contract. Typically, for elevator inspection services, KPIs would likely include metrics such as on-time inspection completion rates, accuracy of inspection reports, adherence to safety standards, and response times for reporting critical issues. SLAs would define the expected frequency and thoroughness of inspections, reporting timelines, and any required corrective actions. These details are usually found within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS).

What is the track record of Reliant Elevator Inspections & Consulting, Inc. with federal contracts?

Information on Reliant Elevator Inspections & Consulting, Inc.'s specific track record with federal contracts is not detailed in the provided data. As this is a definitive contract award, it suggests the company has likely performed work for the government previously or was deemed capable through the procurement process. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations, contract history, and any reported issues or successes on federal awards. The 'not available for competition' status might indicate a unique or sole-source relationship, or a recent entry into government contracting.

What is the historical spending trend for elevator inspection services at the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) airport or similar FAA facilities?

The provided data does not include historical spending trends for elevator inspection services at MSP or similar FAA facilities. To analyze this, one would need to access historical contract databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) and search for previous contracts awarded for similar services at the specified location or by the agency. Understanding historical spending can reveal patterns of contract duration, value, competition levels, and potential cost increases over time, providing context for the current award.

Are there any specific risks identified by the FAA regarding elevator safety or maintenance at MSP that necessitated this contract?

The provided data does not specify any particular risks identified by the FAA regarding elevator safety or maintenance at MSP that directly led to this contract award. However, the nature of elevator systems inherently involves safety risks, including mechanical failures, entrapments, and accessibility issues. Regular, professional inspections are crucial for mitigating these risks and ensuring compliance with safety codes. The contract's duration suggests a proactive approach to managing these ongoing safety requirements.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: QUALITY CONTROL, TEST, INSPECTION › INSPECTION SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 697DCK-23-R-00451

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5020 RUNNING BROOK DR, JOSHUA, TX, 76058

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Sole Proprietorship, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $150,724

Exercised Options: $87,679

Current Obligation: $87,679

Actual Outlays: $54,708

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline