HUD awards $10.18M for Field Service Management in Michigan, with a 404-day duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,183,554 ($10.2M)

Contractor: J G M Property Group, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development

Start Date: 2026-01-07

End Date: 2027-02-15

Contract Duration: 404 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FIELD SERVICE MANAGEMENT AREA 6A/7A

Place of Performance

Location: UTICA, MACOMB County, MICHIGAN, 48316

State: Michigan Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Housing and Urban Development obligated $10.2 million to J G M PROPERTY GROUP, INC. for work described as: FIELD SERVICE MANAGEMENT AREA 6A/7A Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in property management services for the specified region. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are assessed to understand pricing efficiency. 3. Risk indicators are evaluated based on contract type and duration. 4. Performance context is considered against similar service contracts. 5. The sector positioning highlights the importance of property management within federal housing initiatives. 6. The contract's fixed-price nature aims to control costs over its term.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $10.18 million for a 404-day period suggests a moderate investment for field service management. Benchmarking against similar contracts for residential property management services would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The firm fixed-price structure indicates an expectation of predictable costs, which is generally favorable for the government. However, without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive assessment of cost-effectiveness is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. The number of bidders is not specified, but the competitive nature of the award process is expected to drive more favorable pricing and service terms for the government. This approach generally leads to a wider pool of potential contractors and encourages innovation.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to lower prices and higher quality services, ensuring federal funds are used efficiently.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are residents within the service area managed under this contract, who will receive property management services. Services delivered include residential property management, ensuring the upkeep and administration of housing units. The geographic impact is focused on Michigan, specifically within the areas designated by 'AREA 6A/7A'. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for property managers, maintenance staff, and administrative personnel within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if service requirements are not clearly defined and managed.
Dependence on contractor performance for timely and effective property maintenance.
Risk of unforeseen maintenance issues impacting budget and resident satisfaction.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract helps control costs and provides budget certainty.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
Clear contract duration provides a defined period for service delivery.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically focusing on residential property management. This sector is crucial for the effective operation of federal housing programs. Comparable spending in this area can vary significantly based on the scale and complexity of properties managed, but federal agencies consistently contract for such services to maintain their real estate assets.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not provided in the data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem cannot be assessed from the given details. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved as subcontractors or if this contract was specifically targeted for small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Federal Housing Administration (FHA) programs
Public and Indian Housing programs
Government property management contracts
Residential real estate services

Risk Flags

Contract duration may be subject to change based on performance and funding.
Potential for cost overruns if scope is not strictly managed.
Dependence on contractor's financial stability and operational capacity.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded $10.2 million to J G M PROPERTY GROUP, INC.. FIELD SERVICE MANAGEMENT AREA 6A/7A

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J G M PROPERTY GROUP, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development (Department of Housing and Urban Development).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-01-07. End: 2027-02-15.

What is the historical spending pattern for Field Service Management Area 6A/7A by HUD?

Analyzing historical spending for this specific Field Service Management Area (6A/7A) by HUD would require access to detailed procurement data over multiple fiscal years. Without this granular data, it's impossible to establish a precise spending trend. However, HUD's overall budget allocation for property management and maintenance services can be reviewed to understand broader patterns. Typically, such spending fluctuates based on the number of properties managed, their condition, and the prevailing market rates for services. A consistent or increasing trend might indicate growing needs or inflation, while a decrease could suggest program consolidation or efficiency gains. Further investigation into HUD's annual reports and procurement databases would be necessary to quantify this specific area's historical spending.

How does the awarded price compare to similar residential property management contracts?

To compare the awarded price of $10.18 million for 404 days, we would need to benchmark it against similar contracts for residential property management services. Key comparison factors include the number of units managed, geographic location (as market rates vary), scope of services (e.g., maintenance, leasing, tenant relations), and contract duration. Without access to a database of comparable federal or even large-scale private sector contracts, a precise comparison is difficult. However, the average cost per unit per month for property management can range from $50 to $150 or more, depending on these factors. If this contract covers a substantial number of units, the $10.18 million might represent a competitive rate, especially if it includes comprehensive services. A detailed analysis would involve identifying contracts with similar characteristics and calculating the cost per unit or per service hour.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract?

While firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally favored for cost control, they carry specific risks. For the contractor, the primary risk is underestimating costs, leading to reduced profit margins or even losses if unforeseen issues arise, such as unexpected repair needs or increased labor costs. For the government, the risk lies in the potential for the contractor to cut corners on service quality to maintain profitability, especially if performance monitoring is insufficient. There's also a risk that the contractor may be less willing to accommodate minor scope adjustments without formal change orders, potentially slowing down necessary adaptations. Effective risk mitigation involves robust performance monitoring, clear service level agreements, and a well-defined scope of work to ensure quality is maintained despite the fixed-price nature.

What is the track record of J G M PROPERTY GROUP, INC. in managing federal contracts?

Assessing the track record of J G M PROPERTY GROUP, INC. requires examining their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those with agencies like HUD. This involves reviewing contract databases (such as SAM.gov or FPDS) for previous awards, their values, durations, and any reported performance issues or successes. Information on past performance evaluations, if available, would be crucial. A history of successful contract completion, adherence to timelines and budgets, and positive performance reviews would indicate reliability. Conversely, a record of contract disputes, terminations, or poor performance ratings would raise concerns. Without specific data on J G M PROPERTY GROUP, INC.'s federal contract history, it's impossible to provide a definitive assessment of their track record.

How does the duration of this contract (404 days) impact its overall value and risk?

A contract duration of 404 days, approximately 13 months, is a standard term for many service contracts. For value, this duration allows for a sustained period of service delivery, enabling the contractor to establish efficient operations and the government to benefit from consistent management. It's long enough to realize the benefits of the services but short enough to allow for reassessment and potential re-competition or modification if needs change. In terms of risk, a longer duration can increase the potential for unforeseen issues (e.g., market fluctuations, changes in property conditions) to impact costs, although the firm fixed-price nature aims to mitigate this. Conversely, very short contracts might not provide enough time for effective implementation or could lead to higher per-diem costs due to mobilization. This duration appears balanced for managing residential properties effectively.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing › Activities Related to Real Estate › Residential Property Managers

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7747 25 MILE RD, SHELBY TOWNSHIP, MI, 48316

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,183,554

Exercised Options: $10,183,554

Current Obligation: $10,183,554

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 86614524D00007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline