Department of Defense awards $301M contract for facilities operations support services to Chenega Technology Services Co

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $300,958,009 ($301.0M)

Contractor: Ctsc, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-03-29

End Date: 2010-09-30

Contract Duration: 3,107 days

Daily Burn Rate: $96.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200212!017712!2100!AB07 !USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0702CP617 !A!N! !Y! !20020329!20120930!048418730!048418730!622692994!N!CHENEGA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CO!6800 VERSAR CENTER !SPRINGFIELD !VA!22151!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!+000000200000!N!N!000000000000!S216!FACILITIES OPERATIONS SUPPORT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !561210!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !A!N!R!2!002!K! !C!Y!Z! ! !N!A!N!N!F! ! ! !D!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: FORT MONMOUTH, MONMOUTH County, NEW JERSEY, 07703

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $301.0 million to CTSC, LLC for work described as: 200212!017712!2100!AB07 !USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0702CP617 !A!N! !Y! !20020329!20120930!048418730!048418730!622692994!N!CHENEGA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CO!6800 VERSAR CENTER !SPRINGFIELD !VA!22151!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMO… Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee, which incentivizes contractor performance. 3. The duration of the contract is over 8 years, suggesting a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract was awarded to a single entity, Chenega Technology Services Co. 5. The services provided fall under Facilities Support Services, a broad category of operational support. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the DoD.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $301 million over approximately 8.5 years suggests an average annual value of around $35 million. Benchmarking this against similar facilities support contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type allows for flexibility in pricing based on performance, which can sometimes lead to higher costs if performance targets are not met or are set too low. The contract's value appears substantial, but a direct comparison to market rates for equivalent services would require a deeper dive into the specific scope of work and performance metrics.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' While this indicates an initial intent for broad competition, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause suggests that certain potential bidders may have been excluded prior to the main competition. The data indicates two bids were received. A higher number of bidders typically leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government. With only two bids, the level of competition might be considered moderate rather than robust, potentially impacting the government's ability to secure the most favorable pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The moderate competition level means taxpayers may not have benefited from the lowest possible prices that a more extensive bidding process could have yielded. While the contract was competed, the exclusion of some sources could have limited the overall cost savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military installations and personnel requiring facilities operations support. Services delivered include a wide range of facilities support, crucial for the daily functioning of military bases. The geographic impact is centered in New Jersey, where the contractor is located, and potentially at various Army installations served. Workforce implications include job creation and sustainment for Chenega Technology Services Co. and its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to the Cost Plus Award Fee structure if performance incentives are not tightly managed.
Limited competition (two bids) may have resulted in a higher price than if more vendors had participated.
The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type warrants further investigation into why certain vendors were excluded.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting an effort to maximize the vendor pool.
The Cost Plus Award Fee structure provides an incentive for the contractor to perform well.
The contract duration indicates a stable, long-term need for these essential services.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services is a significant sector within government contracting, encompassing a wide array of maintenance, repair, and operational support for physical infrastructure. This contract, valued at $301 million over its life, represents a substantial investment in maintaining the operational readiness of Department of the Army facilities. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561210 confirms the focus on facilities support. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific scope of services, but this contract size places it among significant service contracts within the federal IT and professional services landscape.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'ss': false. Furthermore, the data does not explicitly mention subcontracting plans or goals related to small businesses. Without specific set-aside requirements or reported subcontracting efforts, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this particular contract is likely minimal, unless Chenega Technology Services Co. voluntarily engages small businesses in its subcontracting chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure necessitates robust performance monitoring to ensure the award fee is justified. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases, but detailed performance metrics and fee determinations are typically internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Army Base Operations Support
Government Facilities Management Services
Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Cost Plus Award Fee structure requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
Contract duration is lengthy, necessitating ongoing performance evaluation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $301.0 million to CTSC, LLC. 200212!017712!2100!AB07 !USA COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS !DAAB0702CP617 !A!N! !Y! !20020329!20120930!048418730!048418730!622692994!N!CHENEGA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CO!6800 VERSAR CENTER !SPRINGFIELD !VA!22151!24480!025!34!FORT MONMOUTH !MONMOUTH !NEW JERSEY!+000000200000!N!N!000000000000!S216!FACILITIES OPERATIONS SUPPORT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !561210!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CTSC, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $301.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-03-29. End: 2010-09-30.

What specific facilities operations support services are included under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'FACILITIES OPERATIONS SUPPORT SERVICES' under NAICS code 561210. This broad category typically encompasses a range of services essential for the upkeep and operation of physical facilities. These can include, but are not limited to, maintenance and repair of buildings and grounds, custodial services, pest control, refuse collection, security systems maintenance, and potentially energy management. The specific details of the service requirements, performance standards, and deliverables would be outlined in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), which is not included in the provided data. Understanding the precise scope is crucial for evaluating the contract's value and performance.

How does the $301 million total value compare to similar facilities support contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

The total award value of $301 million over approximately 8.5 years (from March 2002 to September 2010) equates to an average annual value of roughly $35 million. Comparing this to similar contracts requires access to a broader dataset of Army facilities support awards during that period. However, contracts of this magnitude are generally considered significant, indicating a substantial requirement for comprehensive facilities management at one or more Army installations. Factors influencing the value include the size and number of facilities, the complexity of services required, and the prevailing market rates for such services at the time of award. Without specific comparable contract data, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents high or low value.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for Chenega Technology Services Co.?

The contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF), which means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a fixed base fee and an award amount. The award amount is determined by the government based on the contractor's performance against pre-defined criteria and metrics. These Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are typically detailed in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Work (SOW). Common KPIs for facilities support contracts include response times for service requests, quality of maintenance and repairs, adherence to safety standards, customer satisfaction, and efficiency in resource utilization. The government's Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) is responsible for monitoring performance and recommending the award fee.

What is the significance of the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award type?

The award type 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' indicates that the solicitation was initially intended for all responsible sources, but certain potential offerors were excluded from the competition prior to the final award decision. This exclusion could be based on various factors, such as specific qualifications, past performance issues, or pre-qualification requirements. While it aims to ensure competition among eligible entities, the exclusion of sources might limit the overall competitive landscape compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition. The rationale behind the exclusion is critical for understanding the full context of the competition and its potential impact on pricing and innovation.

What was the historical spending trend for facilities support services by the Department of the Army around the period of this contract (2002-2010)?

The period between 2002 and 2010 for the Department of the Army was marked by significant global military operations, including those in Iraq and Afghanistan. This often led to increased demand and spending on base operations and support services to maintain readiness and operational capacity in deployed environments and at home stations. Federal spending on facilities support services generally tracks with military readiness requirements and infrastructure investments. While specific historical spending trends for Army facilities support services require detailed analysis of historical budget data and contract awards, it is plausible that spending in this category saw fluctuations, potentially increasing during periods of heightened operational tempo, to support the infrastructure necessary for military personnel and equipment.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Chenega Corporation (UEI: 622692994)

Address: 6800 VERSAR CENTER, SPRINGFIELD, VA, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline