DoD's $10.6M contract for support services awarded to W. Harris Government Services Contractor, Inc. shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,626,232 ($10.6M)

Contractor: W. Harris, Government Services Contractor, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-09-24

End Date: 2008-03-31

Contract Duration: 2,015 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 12

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: TACOMA, PIERCE County, WASHINGTON, 98433

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.6 million to W. HARRIS, GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACTOR, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract's duration of over 5 years and final value suggest a need for detailed performance and pricing analysis. 2. Competition was limited, raising questions about price discovery and potential overpayment. 3. The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES', indicating a non-standard competitive process. 4. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but the final value needs benchmarking against similar services. 5. Performance context is limited without specific deliverables, but the duration implies significant operational support. 6. Sector positioning is within general government support services, a broad category with varying efficiency benchmarks.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The final award amount of $10.6 million over approximately 5.5 years averages to about $1.9 million annually. Without specific details on the services rendered, it is difficult to benchmark against similar contracts. However, the duration and total value suggest a substantial service requirement. The fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the contractor bore the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the price was competitive.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES', which is a less common and potentially more restrictive competitive procedure than standard full and open competition. While it implies some level of competition, the exclusion of certain sources could limit the bidder pool. The presence of 12 bids suggests a reasonable number of interested parties, but the specific nature of the exclusion needs further investigation to understand its impact on the final price.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, even with 12 bidders, may have resulted in a higher price for taxpayers than if a broader, unrestricted competition had been conducted. Understanding the rationale for excluding sources is crucial for assessing the true value achieved.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel and their families served by the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA). The contract provided essential support services, though the exact nature of these services is not detailed. Geographic impact is likely concentrated around military installations where DeCA operates. Workforce implications could include direct employment by the contractor or its subcontractors to fulfill the service requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' is a red flag that warrants further investigation into the reasons for source exclusion and its impact on competition.
Lack of specific service details makes it challenging to assess performance and value for money accurately.
The contract's duration and significant value necessitate robust oversight to ensure continued performance and cost control.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded using a fixed-price type, which generally aligns costs with performance and incentivizes contractor efficiency.
The presence of 12 bids indicates a degree of market interest, suggesting that the opportunity was attractive to multiple firms.
The contract was awarded to a known government services contractor, potentially indicating a level of established capability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broad 'All Other Support Services' category (NAICS 561990), which encompasses a wide range of non-professional, non-technical support activities for businesses and government. The defense support services sector is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to maintaining military readiness and operational infrastructure. Benchmarking requires comparing the specific services rendered to similar contracts within the defense or broader government support services market.

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 primary contractor, W. Harris Government Services Contractor, Inc., is likely a larger entity, and the contract's value does not suggest it was specifically designed for small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) to monitor performance, ensure compliance with contract terms, and manage payments. Transparency is dependent on the public availability of contract performance reports and post-award reviews, which are not detailed here. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Commissary Agency Operations Support
Government Support Services Contracts
Logistics and Readiness Support
Base Operations Support

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Lack of detailed service description hinders value assessment.
Potential for price inflation due to restricted bidding pool.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.6 million to W. HARRIS, GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACTOR, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is W. HARRIS, GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACTOR, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Commissary Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-09-24. End: 2008-03-31.

What specific support services were provided under this contract, and how did they contribute to the Defense Commissary Agency's mission?

The provided data classifies the contract under NAICS code 561990, 'All Other Support Services,' and indicates the awarding agency as the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA). This broad classification suggests the services could range from administrative support, facility maintenance, logistical assistance, or other operational functions essential for DeCA's operations. Without more granular detail, it's impossible to pinpoint the exact services. However, DeCA's mission is to provide groceries and household goods to military personnel and their families at a savings. Therefore, the support services likely facilitated the efficient functioning of commissary stores, potentially including inventory management, customer service support, facility upkeep, or administrative tasks that enabled DeCA to fulfill its mission effectively.

How does the final award value of $10.6 million compare to the initial estimated value or similar contracts for support services?

The provided data does not include an initial estimated value for the contract, making a direct comparison of the final award against estimates impossible. To benchmark the $10.6 million final award, one would need to identify comparable contracts for 'All Other Support Services' awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies during a similar timeframe (2002-2008). Key comparison points would include the duration of the contract, the specific services rendered, the geographic scope, and the number of bidders. If similar contracts for comparable services were awarded at a significantly lower price, or if this contract's price per service unit is higher than market rates, it could indicate a potential issue with value for money.

What are the implications of the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' award type on price and competition?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' (FOUCAES) award type is a deviation from standard full and open competition. It means that while the competition was intended to be open to all responsible sources, specific sources were intentionally excluded based on predefined criteria. This exclusion, if not rigorously justified and narrowly applied, can limit the competitive landscape. A smaller pool of bidders may lead to less aggressive pricing and potentially higher costs for the government compared to a truly unrestricted competition. The fact that 12 bids were received suggests some level of interest, but the impact of the exclusion on the final price discovery process needs careful consideration.

What is the track record of W. Harris Government Services Contractor, Inc. in fulfilling federal contracts, particularly those of similar size and scope?

The provided data identifies W. Harris Government Services Contractor, Inc. as the awardee but does not offer details on their past performance or track record. To assess their reliability and capability, one would need to examine their contract history, including past performance evaluations, any instances of contract disputes or terminations, and their experience with similar types of support services. A review of contract databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) could reveal previous awards, their values, and performance ratings. A history of successful contract completion, especially for large, complex service contracts, would be a positive indicator, while a pattern of issues could raise concerns about future performance.

What risks are associated with a fixed-price contract of this duration and value, and what mitigation strategies were likely in place?

Fixed-price contracts, while aiming to control costs, carry risks, especially for long-duration, high-value agreements. For the government, the primary risk is that the fixed price might be too high if the contractor's initial cost estimates were overly conservative or if market conditions changed favorably for the contractor. Conversely, the contractor risks underestimating costs, leading to reduced profit margins or even losses. For a contract spanning over five years, risks include scope creep, unforeseen technical challenges, or changes in government requirements that could necessitate contract modifications, potentially increasing the price. Mitigation strategies likely included detailed performance work statements, clear change order procedures, robust oversight by a COR, and potentially economic price adjustment clauses if applicable to account for significant market fluctuations.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Other Support Services › All Other Support Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 12

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: PMB 227 104 E FAIRVIEW AV, MERIDIAN, ID, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Veteran Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline