DOE's $253M Facilities Support Services contract awarded to CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING shows long duration and limited competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $25,332,422 ($25.3M)
Contractor: Critique Resource Consulting
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2000-05-15
End Date: 2005-10-15
Contract Duration: 1,979 days
Daily Burn Rate: $12.8K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 16
Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS
Sector: Other
Place of Performance
Location: OAK RIDGE, ANDERSON County, TENNESSEE, 37830
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $25.3 million to CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract's extended duration of nearly 2000 days suggests a need for sustained services, but also raises questions about long-term value and potential for market stagnation. 2. Awarded under a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' justification, this contract bypasses standard competitive processes, potentially limiting price discovery and innovation. 3. The Time and Materials (T&M) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed, especially over a long period. 4. While specific performance metrics are not detailed, the significant value indicates a substantial impact on the contractor's operations and the facilities supported. 5. The contract's focus on Facilities Support Services places it within a broad category of essential operational support for government infrastructure. 6. The lack of small business set-aside or subcontracting information warrants further investigation into opportunities for smaller firms.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this $253 million contract is challenging without detailed performance data and comparable contract information. However, the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' award type and Time and Materials pricing structure raise concerns about achieving optimal value for money. The extended duration of nearly five years also suggests a significant investment that requires rigorous oversight to ensure costs remain aligned with market rates and service delivery expectations. Without clear performance benchmarks or competitive pricing analysis, it is difficult to definitively assess the value proposition.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded under a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' justification, indicating that a full and open competition was not conducted. This typically occurs when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement, or in specific emergency situations. The absence of multiple bidders means there was no direct price comparison through a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to a less favorable price for the government compared to a competed award. The limited competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces for cost savings.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the lack of competitive pressure. Without a bidding process, the government cannot be assured it received the lowest possible price for these essential facilities support services.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy facilities that receive essential support services, ensuring operational continuity and maintenance. Services delivered likely include a range of facility management functions such as maintenance, repair, custodial services, and potentially security or groundskeeping. The geographic impact is concentrated in Tennessee (ST), where the contract is managed, supporting federal operations within that region. The contract supports the workforce employed by CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING, providing jobs and economic activity related to facilities management.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced incentive for cost efficiency.
- Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost escalation if not meticulously managed and monitored.
- The extended duration of the contract may indicate a lack of market dynamism or opportunities for service innovation.
- Absence of small business participation details suggests potential missed opportunities for economic inclusion.
- Limited public information on performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness and quality of services provided.
Positive Signals
- The contract ensures continuity of essential facilities support services for the Department of Energy, crucial for operational stability.
- A single, long-term award can provide stability and predictability for both the government and the contractor.
- The contractor, CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING, has been awarded a significant contract, indicating a level of trust and established relationship with the agency.
- The contract's value suggests a comprehensive scope of services designed to meet substantial facility needs.
Sector Analysis
Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) represent a significant segment of the government contracting market, encompassing a wide array of services essential for maintaining government buildings and infrastructure. This sector includes everything from routine maintenance and janitorial services to specialized technical support. Spending in this area is often stable due to the ongoing nature of facility upkeep. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more specific service details, but the $253 million awarded to CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING over its period of performance is substantial, indicating a large-scale support operation.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Furthermore, there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements or goals. This suggests that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this contract may be limited, either directly or indirectly through subcontracting. A lack of small business involvement in large sole-source contracts can be a concern for fostering a diverse and competitive federal contracting ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Energy's contracting officers and program managers. Given the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' award and Time and Materials structure, rigorous monitoring of labor hours, costs, and performance against the Statement of Work would be critical. Transparency is limited by the lack of competitive bidding information. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Energy would have jurisdiction to investigate potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.
Related Government Programs
- General Services Administration (GSA) Facilities Management Contracts
- Department of Defense Base Operations Support (BOS)
- Other Agency-Specific Facilities Maintenance Contracts
- Government Building Operations and Maintenance Services
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award bypasses competitive pricing.
- Time and Materials contract type poses cost overrun risk.
- Extended contract duration limits flexibility and innovation.
- Lack of small business participation noted.
- Limited performance data available for value assessment.
Tags
facilities-support-services, department-of-energy, tennessee, time-and-materials, sole-source, large-contract, facilities-management, operational-support, critique-resource-consulting, federal-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $25.3 million to CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CRITIQUE RESOURCE CONSULTING.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $25.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2000-05-15. End: 2005-10-15.
What specific facilities support services are included under this contract?
The contract falls under NAICS code 561210, Facilities Support Services. While the specific details are not provided in the abbreviated data, this category typically encompasses a broad range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of government facilities. These can include, but are not limited to, building maintenance and repair, janitorial and custodial services, groundskeeping, pest control, security services, waste management, and potentially specialized technical support for building systems such as HVAC, electrical, and plumbing. The significant value of the contract suggests a comprehensive suite of services is being provided to multiple Department of Energy locations or a very large single facility.
What is the justification for awarding this contract as 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'?
The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' (often referred to as sole-source) justification implies that the Department of Energy determined that only one responsible source was capable of providing the required facilities support services. Common reasons for such a determination include unique capabilities, proprietary technology, extensive past performance with the specific agency needs, or a critical need that cannot be met through competitive means within the required timeframe. Without further documentation (like a Justification and Approval document), the precise reason remains speculative. However, this procurement approach bypasses the standard competitive process, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs for the government.
How does the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type impact cost control for this contract?
Time and Materials (T&M) contracts are used when the government cannot accurately estimate the extent or duration of the work. In a T&M contract, the contractor is reimbursed for the actual cost of direct labor (at specified hourly rates) and materials, plus a fee or profit. For a contract valued at $253 million over nearly five years, the T&M structure presents significant cost control challenges. It places a heavy burden on the government to meticulously monitor labor hours, ensure rates are fair and reasonable, and scrutinize all material costs. Without robust oversight and clear performance standards, T&M contracts carry a higher risk of cost overruns compared to fixed-price contracts, as the contractor's incentive is to perform more work rather than to complete it efficiently.
What is the historical spending pattern for facilities support services at the Department of Energy?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for facilities support services at the Department of Energy (DOE) requires access to detailed procurement data beyond the scope of this single contract. However, it is generally understood that agencies like the DOE, which manage extensive physical infrastructure (laboratories, power plants, administrative buildings), have consistent and substantial needs for facilities support. Spending in this category is typically driven by the number and type of facilities, their age, and the level of services required. Without comparative data on previous contracts for similar services, it's difficult to determine if the $253 million award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of spending for the DOE in this sector.
What are the potential risks associated with the long duration (1979 days) of this contract?
The contract's duration of approximately 1979 days (over 5 years) presents several potential risks. Firstly, it increases the likelihood of cost escalation due to inflation and potential changes in labor costs over an extended period, especially with a T&M structure. Secondly, a long-term commitment can reduce the government's flexibility to adapt to changing needs or adopt new technologies and service delivery methods. It may also stifle innovation from other potential vendors who are locked out of the market for an extended duration. Finally, over such a long period, maintaining consistent oversight and ensuring the contractor remains motivated to provide high-quality, cost-effective services can become challenging.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Offers Received: 16
Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)
Contractor Details
Address: 10001 LAKE FOREST BLVD, NEW ORLEANS, LA, 02
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $27,070,580
Exercised Options: $25,271,698
Current Obligation: $25,332,422
Timeline
Start Date: 2000-05-15
Current End Date: 2005-10-15
Potential End Date: 2005-10-15 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2012-07-03
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)