DoD's $10.9M contract with M.E.S. INC for services, awarded under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,898,469 ($10.9M)

Contractor: M.E.S. Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2001-09-29

End Date: 2004-10-14

Contract Duration: 1,111 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: BEVERLY, BURLINGTON County, NEW JERSEY, 08010

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.9 million to M.E.S. INC for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract value of $10.9 million over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in the services provided. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, this contract likely benefited from a competitive bidding process to ensure fair pricing. 3. The duration of 1111 days indicates a long-term need for the services, potentially leading to economies of scale. 4. The firm fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially protecting the government from cost overruns. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, part of the larger Department of Defense, highlighting its strategic importance. 6. The contractor, M.E.S. INC, has secured a substantial award, indicating their capability to meet the government's requirements.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $10.9 million contract is challenging without specific details on the services rendered. However, the duration of over three years suggests a substantial commitment. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract is a positive indicator for cost control, as it places the financial risk on the contractor. Further analysis would require comparing the per-unit cost of the services to similar contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 6 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. A competitive environment generally leads to better price discovery and can result in more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to vie for the contract, driving down prices and ensuring the government receives the best value for its investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the personnel and operations within the Department of the Army that require the services procured under this contract. The services delivered are expected to support the Army's mission objectives, though the specific nature of these services is not detailed. The contract's performance is geographically centered in New Jersey, where the contractor is located. The contract may have implications for the workforce in New Jersey, potentially creating or sustaining jobs related to the services provided.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific service details makes it difficult to assess the true value for money.
The long contract duration could lead to vendor lock-in if not managed carefully.
Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined and managed throughout the contract lifecycle.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government.
Multiple bidders (6) suggest a competitive market for these services.

Sector Analysis

The Department of Defense frequently procures a wide range of services, from IT support to specialized operational functions. Contracts of this magnitude, over $10 million, are common within the defense sector, reflecting the substantial needs of military branches. The market for such services is often characterized by a mix of large prime contractors and specialized small businesses. This contract likely fits into a broader category of professional, administrative, or technical support services essential for military readiness and operations.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. The presence of 6 bidders in a full and open competition suggests that both large and potentially small businesses had the opportunity to compete. However, without specific subcontracting plans or data, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem remains unclear. Further investigation into subcontracting opportunities would be necessary to fully assess its effect on small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

The Department of the Army, as part of the Department of Defense, is subject to various oversight mechanisms. These include internal audits, program management reviews, and potentially oversight from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or the Inspector General. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics and spending breakdowns may not always be publicly accessible. Accountability rests with the contracting officers and program managers responsible for ensuring the contractor meets the terms of the contract.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Services Contracts
Army Professional and Administrative Support
Firm Fixed Price Service Agreements

Risk Flags

Lack of specific service details hinders comprehensive value assessment.
Contract duration may present risks if requirements evolve or costs fluctuate significantly.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.9 million to M.E.S. INC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is M.E.S. INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2001-09-29. End: 2004-10-14.

What specific services were provided under this $10.9 million contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the services rendered under this $10.9 million contract awarded to M.E.S. INC by the Department of the Army. Federal contract databases often categorize awards broadly, and without access to the contract's statement of work or detailed descriptions, it's impossible to determine if the services were related to IT, logistics, maintenance, consulting, or another domain. This lack of specificity is common for high-level award summaries and hinders a granular assessment of the contract's purpose and value.

How does the $10.9 million contract value compare to similar services procured by the Department of the Army?

Comparing the $10.9 million contract value requires identifying similar service categories and contract durations within the Department of the Army's procurement history. Given the contract's duration of 1111 days (approximately 3 years), the annual value is roughly $3.3 million. This figure falls within a common range for significant service contracts awarded by large federal agencies. However, without knowing the specific services, a precise benchmark is not feasible. A comprehensive analysis would involve querying databases for contracts with similar North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes or Product Service Codes (PSCs) and comparing their total values and annual spending.

What is the track record of M.E.S. INC with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

The provided data indicates M.E.S. INC was awarded this $10.9 million contract by the Department of the Army. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their complete federal contract history, including past performance on other awards, any reported issues, and their overall value of contracts received. A positive track record would involve successful completion of previous contracts, adherence to timelines and budgets, and positive performance reviews. Conversely, a history of contract disputes, performance failures, or significant overruns would raise concerns about their reliability and capability for future awards.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract of this duration?

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts, while generally beneficial for cost control, carry specific risks, especially for longer durations like the 1111 days of this contract. A primary risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or service delivery to maximize profit if costs escalate unexpectedly due to unforeseen circumstances not covered by contract clauses. Conversely, if the government's needs change significantly, modifying an FFP contract can be complex and costly. For the contractor, underestimating costs or facing unexpected market fluctuations can lead to financial losses. Careful scope definition and change management are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How does the 'full and open competition' with 6 bidders impact the value received by taxpayers?

Full and open competition, especially with a healthy number of bidders like the 6 in this case, generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment. This competition encourages bidders to offer their best pricing and most innovative solutions to win the contract. It increases the likelihood that the government secures services at a fair market price, reducing the risk of overpayment. Furthermore, it provides a broader pool of potential contractors, potentially leading to better quality and more efficient service delivery. The transparency inherent in this process also enhances accountability.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 231 - 46TH STREET, BROOKLYN, NY, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline