Department of Energy's $14.8M facilities support contract awarded to Eagle Design, Inc. shows strong competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $14,839,824 ($14.8M)
Contractor: Eagle Design, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2008-09-03
End Date: 2015-01-31
Contract Duration: 2,341 days
Daily Burn Rate: $6.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: GROUNDS MAINTENANCE, JANITORIAL, AND RELATED SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: PITTSBURGH, ALLEGHENY County, PENNSYLVANIA, 15223, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $14.8 million to EAGLE DESIGN, INC. for work described as: GROUNDS MAINTENANCE, JANITORIAL, AND RELATED SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract value of $14.8 million over its period of performance suggests a significant investment in facilities support. 2. The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' indicates a robust bidding process, likely driving competitive pricing. 3. With 6 bidders, the level of competition appears healthy, suggesting a good range of market options were considered. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type generally transfers risk to the contractor, potentially leading to more predictable costs. 5. The duration of 2341 days (approx. 6.4 years) indicates a long-term need for these services. 6. The NAICS code 561210 points to a standardized industry classification for facilities support services.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The total award of $14.8 million over approximately 6.4 years averages to about $2.3 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale facilities support contracts requires detailed analysis of scope and location. However, the presence of strong competition suggests that the pricing achieved was likely within a reasonable market range. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract also implies that the contractor bears the primary responsibility for cost overruns, which is a positive indicator for value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was competed as 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' with 6 bidders participating. This indicates that while the competition was open, there might have been specific criteria or exclusions that narrowed the initial pool of potential offerors. The presence of 6 bidders is a positive sign for price discovery, suggesting that multiple companies vied for the contract, which typically leads to more competitive pricing than a sole-source award.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process with multiple bidders generally benefits taxpayers by ensuring that the government receives services at a price reflecting market conditions, rather than a price determined by a single provider.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy facilities, which receive essential grounds maintenance and janitorial services. These services ensure the operational readiness and upkeep of government infrastructure. The contract's geographic impact is centered in Pennsylvania, where the services are delivered. The contract supports jobs within the facilities maintenance and support services sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for price creep if contract scope significantly expands beyond initial fixed-price parameters.
- Reliance on a single contractor for an extended period could lead to complacency or reduced service quality if not actively managed.
- The 'exclusion of sources' aspect of the competition warrants further investigation to ensure it did not unduly limit market participation.
Positive Signals
- The firm-fixed-price structure incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
- A competitive award process with 6 bidders suggests a healthy market response and likely fair pricing.
- The long contract duration provides stability and continuity for essential facility services.
Sector Analysis
Facilities support services, encompassing grounds maintenance and janitorial work, is a significant segment within the broader commercial services industry. This contract falls under the Facilities Support Services category (NAICS 561210). The market for these services is generally characterized by a mix of large, established providers and smaller, specialized firms. Government contracts often represent a substantial portion of revenue for companies in this sector due to their scale and duration. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be assessed against other large federal facilities maintenance contracts.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities if Eagle Design, Inc. chooses to engage them. Without specific subcontracting plans or data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. However, large prime contracts like this can sometimes limit opportunities for small businesses to compete directly for prime contract awards.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program officials within the Department of Energy. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. The specific jurisdiction of an Inspector General would depend on whether the contract falls under their audit or investigative purview, which is common for significant federal expenditures.
Related Government Programs
- General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Buildings Fund
- Department of Defense Base Operations Support
- National Park Service Facility Management
- General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Service
Risk Flags
- Potential for scope creep in long-term contracts.
- Contractor performance degradation over extended periods.
- Market shifts impacting long-term pricing competitiveness.
- Ensuring 'exclusion of sources' criteria were justified and did not unduly restrict competition.
Tags
facilities-support, grounds-maintenance, janitorial-services, department-of-energy, eagle-design-inc, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, pennsylvania, large-contract, service-contract, facilities-management
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $14.8 million to EAGLE DESIGN, INC.. GROUNDS MAINTENANCE, JANITORIAL, AND RELATED SERVICES
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is EAGLE DESIGN, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $14.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-09-03. End: 2015-01-31.
What is the historical spending pattern for grounds maintenance and janitorial services at the Department of Energy?
Analyzing historical spending for grounds maintenance and janitorial services at the Department of Energy (DOE) requires accessing detailed procurement data over multiple fiscal years. While this specific contract award of $14.8 million is significant, understanding the broader pattern involves looking at the total annual expenditure across all DOE components for these services. Trends might reveal increasing or decreasing investments, shifts in contracting strategies (e.g., more full-and-open vs. set-asides), and the average contract values. Without access to a comprehensive historical database for the DOE's facilities support spending, a precise analysis is not possible. However, generally, federal agencies aim for stable or optimized spending in these areas, balancing cost-efficiency with the need for well-maintained facilities.
How does the per-unit cost of services under this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar facilities?
Determining the per-unit cost requires breaking down the total contract value ($14.8M) by the specific services rendered and their quantities (e.g., cost per square foot cleaned, cost per acre maintained). This contract's NAICS code (561210) covers a broad range of facilities support. Comparing this to industry benchmarks would involve accessing commercial cost data for janitorial and grounds maintenance services, adjusted for geographic location (Pennsylvania) and the specific types of facilities managed by the DOE. Given the firm-fixed-price nature and the competitive bidding process with 6 bidders, it's likely that the pricing is market-competitive. However, a definitive benchmark comparison would necessitate detailed service scope and quantity data, which is not fully available in the provided summary.
What is Eagle Design, Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly in facilities support?
Eagle Design, Inc. has been awarded this specific Department of Energy contract valued at $14.8 million for grounds maintenance, janitorial, and related services. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their complete federal contract history, looking for prior awards in similar service categories and with other agencies. Key indicators include the number and value of previous contracts, performance ratings (if available), and any history of contract disputes or terminations. A positive performance history with previous federal contracts, especially in facilities support, would suggest a lower risk profile for this current award. Conversely, a history of issues could raise concerns about contractor capability and reliability.
What are the primary risks associated with a long-term (2341 days) facilities support contract like this?
Long-term contracts, such as this 2341-day (approx. 6.4 years) agreement, carry several inherent risks. Firstly, there's the risk of scope creep, where the requirements may evolve beyond the original fixed-price agreement, potentially leading to cost increases if not managed carefully through contract modifications. Secondly, contractor performance can degrade over time due to complacency or changes in their operational capacity, necessitating robust oversight. Thirdly, market conditions and technology can change significantly over such a long period, potentially making the contracted services or pricing less optimal compared to current market rates. Finally, there's the risk associated with the contractor's financial stability and operational continuity over the extended duration.
How does the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' procurement method impact cost and contractor selection?
The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' method is a variation of full and open competition where certain sources are excluded from consideration, but the remaining pool is competed openly. This approach aims to balance broad competition with specific needs or limitations. It typically results in more competitive pricing than sole-source or limited competition, as multiple bidders are encouraged to participate. However, the exclusion of specific sources could potentially limit the diversity of solutions or the number of highly qualified bidders compared to unrestricted full and open competition. The impact on cost is generally positive due to competition, but the selection might be influenced by the specific criteria leading to the exclusions.
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
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: DE-SO26-08NT00193
Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 436 BUTLER ST, PITTSBURGH, PA, 15223
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $14,849,538
Exercised Options: $14,849,538
Current Obligation: $14,839,824
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-09-03
Current End Date: 2015-01-31
Potential End Date: 2015-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-03-19
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)