Homeland Security awards $4.4M contract for Alaska protective services, highlighting security needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,431,877 ($4.4M)

Contractor: GXC Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2026-04-01

End Date: 2027-03-31

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.2K/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: PROTECTIVE SECURITY OFFICER SERVICES THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF ALASKA

Place of Performance

Location: ANCHORAGE, ANCHORAGE County, ALASKA, 99501

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $4.4 million to GXC INC for work described as: PROTECTIVE SECURITY OFFICER SERVICES THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF ALASKA Key points: 1. Contract addresses critical security needs across Alaska. 2. Competition level suggests potential for competitive pricing. 3. Fixed-price contract type offers cost certainty. 4. Long-term contract duration indicates ongoing service requirement. 5. Focus on security guards and patrol services aligns with agency mission. 6. Geographic concentration in Alaska presents unique logistical considerations.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $4.4 million over one year appears reasonable for protective security services across the state of Alaska. Benchmarking against similar state-wide security contracts is challenging due to the specific geographic scope and the nature of the services. However, the firm fixed-price structure suggests that the government has a clear understanding of the costs involved, which is a positive indicator for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while competition was sought, certain sources may have been excluded. The presence of 7 bidders suggests a healthy level of interest, but the exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to ensure maximum competition was achieved. This approach can sometimes be used to ensure specific capabilities are met, but it can also limit price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The competition level, while involving multiple bidders, may have limited the full potential for taxpayer savings that could have been achieved through unrestricted full and open competition. Ensuring that exclusions were justified and necessary is key to maximizing value for money.

Public Impact

Federal facilities and personnel throughout Alaska will receive enhanced security. The contract ensures the continuity of essential protective services. Residents and visitors in Alaska benefit from increased safety and security. The contract supports jobs within the security services industry in Alaska.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Geographic challenges in Alaska could impact service delivery and costs.
Reliance on a single delivery order for a large geographic area.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
Multiple bidders indicate market interest and potential for competitive pricing.
Long-term contract duration suggests a stable and ongoing need for services.

Sector Analysis

The security services industry is a significant sector within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services market. This contract falls under the 'Security Guards and Patrol Services' (NAICS 561612) category. Spending in this area is driven by the need for physical security across government facilities, critical infrastructure, and sensitive sites. The market is characterized by a mix of large, established security firms and smaller, specialized providers.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication of a small business set-aside for this contract. Given the scope and potential requirements for specialized security capabilities across a large geographic area, it is possible that larger firms are better positioned to bid. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities exist for small businesses within the awarded contract.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Procurement Operations. Oversight will likely involve regular performance reviews, adherence to service level agreements, and financial accountability measures. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of financial oversight. Transparency regarding the specific reasons for excluding certain sources would enhance accountability.

Related Government Programs

Federal Protective Service Contracts
Department of Homeland Security Security Services
State-wide Security Contracts
Physical Security Services

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Logistical challenges in remote Alaskan locations.
Weather-related operational disruptions.
Workforce availability in remote areas.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $4.4 million to GXC INC. PROTECTIVE SECURITY OFFICER SERVICES THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF ALASKA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GXC INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Office of Procurement Operations).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-01. End: 2027-03-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for protective security services in Alaska by the Department of Homeland Security?

Analyzing historical spending for protective security services in Alaska by DHS is crucial for understanding the context of this $4.4 million award. Without specific historical data, it's difficult to definitively state if this amount represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment. However, the duration of the contract (364 days) and the firm fixed-price nature suggest a planned and budgeted expenditure for a defined period. If previous contracts for similar services in Alaska were significantly lower or higher, it could indicate changes in security requirements, market prices, or the scope of services. A review of past solicitations and awards for DHS security services in Alaska would reveal trends in contract values, competition levels, and contractor performance, providing a baseline against which to evaluate the current contract's value and necessity.

How does the number of bidders (7) compare to similar security service contracts awarded by DHS?

The award of this contract to GXC INC after competition among 7 bidders provides a moderate level of insight into market interest. To assess if 7 bidders is typical, one would need to compare it to the average number of bids received for similar 'Security Guards and Patrol Services' (NAICS 561612) contracts, particularly those awarded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and those with a similar geographic scope or value. If the average for comparable DHS contracts is significantly higher (e.g., 10-15 bidders), it might suggest that the 'exclusion of sources' limited the pool more than anticipated, potentially impacting price competition. Conversely, if the average is around 5-7 bidders, then this contract falls within the expected range. A lower number of bidders could indicate a specialized market, high barriers to entry, or insufficient outreach.

What are the specific risks associated with providing security services across the entire state of Alaska?

Providing security services across the entire state of Alaska presents several unique risks. Geographically, Alaska is vast with challenging terrain and dispersed population centers, which can lead to significant logistical hurdles in deploying and managing personnel and equipment. Extreme weather conditions, particularly during winter months, can disrupt operations, impact travel, and increase operational costs. Furthermore, the availability of a qualified security workforce in remote areas might be limited, potentially leading to higher labor costs or reliance on personnel commuting long distances. Ensuring consistent service quality and rapid response times across such a large and diverse area requires robust planning, communication, and resource management. The contract's success hinges on the contractor's ability to effectively mitigate these logistical and operational risks.

What is the track record of GXC INC in performing similar federal security contracts?

Evaluating the track record of GXC INC is essential for assessing the risk associated with this $4.4 million contract. Information on past performance, including contract history, client feedback (e.g., CPARS ratings), and any history of contract disputes or terminations, would provide critical insights. If GXC INC has a history of successfully delivering similar security services for federal agencies, especially in challenging environments or for comparable contract values, it would indicate a lower performance risk. Conversely, a history of poor performance, missed deadlines, or quality issues would raise concerns about their ability to meet the requirements of this new contract. Accessing federal contract databases and performance reports would be necessary for a thorough assessment.

How does the firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type influence cost control and potential for overruns?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally favored by the government for services where the scope of work is well-defined, as it shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. For this $4.4 million protective security services contract in Alaska, an FFP structure means that GXC INC is obligated to perform the work for the agreed-upon price, regardless of their actual costs. This incentivizes the contractor to manage their expenses efficiently and control costs. From a taxpayer perspective, an FFP contract offers a high degree of cost certainty, as the final price is fixed. However, if the contractor underestimated costs or encountered unforeseen issues (like extreme weather impacting logistics), they bear the financial burden. This can sometimes lead contractors to build higher contingency into their initial bids, potentially resulting in a higher base price compared to other contract types, but it minimizes the risk of unexpected cost increases for the government.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Guards and Patrol Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 70RFPW26QWA000002

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 212 BETHPAGE SWEET HOLLOW RD, OLD BETHPAGE, NY, 11804

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $54,346,500

Exercised Options: $4,431,877

Current Obligation: $4,431,877

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 70RFP225DEC000006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline