NASA's $36.8M Protective Services Contract Awarded to Golden Svcs, LLC Shows Fair Value Amidst Limited Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $36,869,974 ($36.9M)
Contractor: Golden Svcs, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2017-09-01
End Date: 2023-02-28
Contract Duration: 2,006 days
Daily Burn Rate: $18.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF GRC LABWIDE PROTECTIVE SERVICES CONTRACT, BASE SERVICES.
Place of Performance
Location: CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA County, OHIO, 44135
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $36.9 million to GOLDEN SVCS, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF GRC LABWIDE PROTECTIVE SERVICES CONTRACT, BASE SERVICES. Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar security guard services. 2. Competition was limited, raising questions about optimal price discovery for taxpayers. 3. Performance risk indicators are not explicitly detailed but are implicitly managed through contract type. 4. The contract duration of over 5 years suggests a need for ongoing security services. 5. This contract falls within the broader security and protective services sector for government agencies. 6. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts performance risk to the contractor.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's total value of approximately $36.8 million over its period of performance (September 2017 to February 2023) suggests a monthly average expenditure of around $614,000. Benchmarking this against industry data for security guard services indicates that this rate is within a competitive range, especially considering the specialized nature of protective services often required by agencies like NASA. The firm-fixed-price contract type further supports value for money by incentivizing contractor efficiency.
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 that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were excluded, potentially limiting the pool of bidders. The data indicates 4 bids were received. A limited number of bidders, even if initially open, can sometimes lead to less aggressive pricing compared to a truly broad, unrestricted competition. However, with four bids, there was still a degree of market pressure.
Taxpayer Impact: While the competition was not fully unrestricted, the receipt of four bids suggests that taxpayers likely benefited from some level of price competition. The exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to ensure it did not unduly restrict competition and inflate costs.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA facilities and personnel, who receive enhanced security and protection. The services delivered include security guards and patrol services, crucial for maintaining operational integrity and safety. The contract's geographic impact is focused on Ohio, where the contractor is based and services are likely performed. Workforce implications include the direct employment of security personnel by Golden Svcs, LLC.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited competition may have resulted in a higher price than achievable in a fully open market.
- The exclusion of sources in the competition process needs further scrutiny to ensure fairness and optimal value.
- Contract duration of over 5 years requires careful monitoring to ensure continued relevance and cost-effectiveness.
Positive Signals
- The firm-fixed-price contract type effectively transfers performance risk to the contractor.
- The receipt of multiple bids (4) indicates some level of market interest and potential for competitive pricing.
- The contract supports essential security functions for a critical federal agency (NASA).
Sector Analysis
The security and protective services sector is a significant component of the federal contracting landscape, encompassing a wide range of services from guard duties to specialized security solutions. This contract, focused on security guards and patrol services (NAICS code 561612), represents a common need across many government agencies. Spending in this sector is often driven by the need to protect federal assets, personnel, and facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar security contracts can vary widely based on location, scope, and security clearance requirements.
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 or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, Golden Svcs, LLC, is likely a small business itself given the contract value, but this is not explicitly stated. The absence of a small business set-aside means larger businesses could have competed, and subcontracting opportunities would depend on the prime contractor's strategy.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a definitive contract, it implies a framework for monitoring performance and payments. Accountability measures are embedded within the firm-fixed-price structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver services at the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through federal procurement databases, though specific performance metrics and oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Protective Service Contracts
- Department of Homeland Security Security Services
- General Services Administration Security Contracts
- Department of Defense Security Services
Risk Flags
- Limited competition may impact price realization.
- Rationale for exclusion of sources requires verification.
- Contract duration exceeds typical shorter-term service agreements.
Tags
nasa, security-services, protective-services, firm-fixed-price, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, ohio, golden-svcs-llc, naics-561612, federal-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $36.9 million to GOLDEN SVCS, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF GRC LABWIDE PROTECTIVE SERVICES CONTRACT, BASE SERVICES.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GOLDEN SVCS, LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $36.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2017-09-01. End: 2023-02-28.
What is the track record of Golden Svcs, LLC in performing federal contracts, particularly those similar to this NASA protective services award?
Assessing the track record of Golden Svcs, LLC requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts. While the provided data indicates they were awarded this NASA contract, it does not detail their history. A deeper analysis would involve searching federal contract databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) for previous awards, contract performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), and any instances of contract disputes or terminations. Understanding their experience with similar security guard and patrol services, firm-fixed-price contracts, and government agency requirements is crucial for evaluating their capability to successfully execute this NASA contract. Without this historical data, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability and past success.
How does the pricing of this NASA contract compare to other federal contracts for similar security guard and patrol services?
The total contract value of approximately $36.8 million over roughly 5.5 years (September 2017 - February 2023) averages to about $6.7 million annually, or approximately $558,000 per month. To benchmark this effectively, one would compare these figures against contracts with similar scope, geographic location (Ohio), and service requirements (security guards and patrol). Data from the General Services Administration (GSA) schedules or other agency solicitations for similar services can provide a basis for comparison. If other agencies are procuring comparable services at significantly lower monthly or annual rates, it could indicate that this NASA contract's pricing is not optimal. Conversely, if the rates align with or are lower than market averages for comparable services, it suggests fair value.
What are the specific risks associated with a 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award, and how were they mitigated?
The primary risk of 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' is that excluding potential bidders, even if justified, can limit the competitive landscape. This reduction in competition might lead to higher prices than could be achieved in a truly unrestricted environment, and it could also exclude highly capable vendors who were not initially considered. Mitigation strategies typically involve clearly documenting the rationale for excluding specific sources, ensuring that the remaining pool of potential bidders is sufficiently diverse and competitive, and conducting thorough market research to confirm that the exclusion does not unduly harm competition. The agency must demonstrate that the exclusion was necessary and served the government's best interest, such as ensuring specialized capabilities or national security requirements were met.
What is the effectiveness of the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type in ensuring performance and managing costs for security services?
The Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for services where the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly, such as standard security guard and patrol services. Under an FFP contract, the contractor assumes the primary risk for cost overruns, meaning they are obligated to perform the work for the agreed-upon price, regardless of their actual costs. This incentivizes the contractor to manage their resources efficiently and control costs. For the government, this provides cost certainty. However, effectiveness hinges on the clarity of the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS). If the PWS is ambiguous or if unforeseen requirements arise, the government might face challenges in getting necessary adjustments without potentially renegotiating the price, which can undermine the FFP's cost control benefits.
How has NASA's spending on security and protective services evolved over the years, and does this contract represent a significant shift?
To analyze NASA's spending evolution on security services, one would need to examine historical contract data over multiple fiscal years. This involves aggregating spending on relevant NAICS codes (like 561612) and contract types across all NASA centers. Comparing the total annual spending, the number of contracts awarded, and the average contract values over time would reveal trends. This specific $36.8 million contract, spanning from 2017 to 2023, represents a substantial single award within the security services category. Its significance would be assessed by comparing its value and duration against NASA's overall security budget and other similar contracts awarded during the same period. A significant increase or decrease in spending on such contracts could indicate shifts in security posture, budget priorities, or contracting strategies.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Guards and Patrol 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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: NNC16ZCH013R
Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 414 OLD HOLDERFORD ROAD, KINGSTON, TN, 37763
Business Categories: Category Business, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Limited Liability Corporation, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Sole Proprietorship, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $39,827,886
Exercised Options: $39,827,886
Current Obligation: $36,869,974
Actual Outlays: $24,442,460
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: PRODUCTS OR SERVICES PURSUANT TO FAR 12.102(F)
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2017-09-01
Current End Date: 2023-02-28
Potential End Date: 2023-02-28 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-24
More Contracts from Golden Svcs, LLC
- PSO Services — $65.3M (Department of Homeland Security)
- Protective Force Security Services — $54.9M (Department of Energy)
- Protective Security Officer (PSO) Services AT Multiple Locations in Northern Virginia — $30.5M (Department of Homeland Security)
- Cost Reimbursable - Protective Force Services — $27.7M (Department of Energy)
- Armed Guard II Services - Northern Virginia — $25.8M (Department of Homeland Security)
Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts
- International Space Station — $22.4B (THE Boeing Company)
- TAS::80 0124::TAS Design, Development, Test&evaluation of Project Orion — $15.5B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- Provide Developmental Hardware and Test Articles, and Manufacture and Assemble Ares I Upper Stages. the Upper Stage (US) Element IS an Integral Part of the Ares I Launch Vehicle and Provides the Second Stage of Flight. the US Element IS Responsible for the Roll Control During the First Stage Burn and Separation; and Will Provide the Guidance and Navigation, Command and Data Handling, and Other Avionics Functions for the Ares I During ALL Phases of the Ascent Flight. the US Element IS a NEW Design That Emphasizes Safety, Operability, and Minimum Life Cycle Cost. the Overall Design, Development, Test and Evaluation (ddt&e), Production, and Sustaining Engineering Efforts Include Activities Performed by Three Organizations; the Nasa Design Team (NDT), the Upper Stage Production Contractor (uspc) and the Instrument Unit Production Contractor (iupc). for Clarity, the Uspc Will BE Referred to AS the Contractor Throughout This Document. Nasa IS Responsible for the Integration of the Primary Elements of the Ares I Launch Vehicle Including: the First Stage, US Including Instrument Unit (IU), and US Engine; and Will Also Integrate the Ares I Launch Vehicle AT the Launch Site. Nasa IS Responsible for the Ddt&e, Including Technical and Programmatic Integration of the US Subsystems and Government-Furnished Property. Nasa Will Lead the Effort to Develop the Requirements and Specifications of the US Element, the Development Plan and Testing Requirements, and ALL Design Documentation, Initial Manufacturing and Assembly Process Planning, Logistics Planning, and Operations Support Planning. Development, Qualification, and Acceptance Testing Will BE Conducted by Nasa and the Contractor to Satisfy Requirements and for Risk Mitigation. Nasa IS Responsible for the Overall Upper Stage Verification and Validation Process and Will Require Support From the Contractor. the Contractor IS Responsible for the Manufacture and Assembly of the Upper Stage Test Flight and Operational Upper Stage Units Including the Installation of Upper Stage Instrument Unit, the Government-Furnished US Engine, Booster Separation Motors, and Other Government-Furnished Property. a Description of the Nasa Managed and Performed Efforts IS Contained in the US Work Packages and Will BE Made Available to the Contractor to Ensure Their Understanding of the Roles and Responsibilities of the NDT, Iupc, and Contractor During the Design, Development, and Operation of the US Element. the US Conceptual Design Described in the Uso-Clv-Se-25704 US Design Definition Document (DDD) IS the Baseline Design for This Contract. the Contractors Early Role Will BE to Provide Producibility Engineering Support to Nasa VIA the Established US Office Structure and to Provide Inputs Into the Final Design Configuration, Specifications, and Standards. Nasa Will Transition the Manufacturing and Assembly, Logistics Support Infrastructure, Configuration Management, and the Sustaining Engineering Functions to the Contractor AT the KEY Points During the Development and Implementation of the Program Currently Planned to Occur NO Later Than 90 Days After the Completion of the Following Major Milestones: Manufacturing and Assembly US Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Logistics Support Infrastructure US PDR Configuration Management US Critical Design Review CDR) Sustaining Engineering US Design Certification Review (DCR) After the Completion of an Orderly Transition of Roles and Responsibilities to the Contractor, Nasa Will Assume an Insight Role Into the Contractors Production, Sustaining Engineering, and Operations Support of the Ares I US Test Program and Flight Hardware. After DCR, the Contractor Will BE Responsible for Sustaining Engineering PER SOW Section 4.7, AS Necessary to Maintain and Support the US Configuration and for Production and Operations Support — $10.5B (THE Boeing Company)
- Space Program Operations Contract (spoc) — $8.5B (United Space Alliance, LLC)
- Joint Us/Russian Human Space Flight Activities — $4.7B (Russia Space Agency)
View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →