DoD's $11.9M contract for air transportation support awarded to WALTER'S SERVICES, INC. shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,931,679 ($11.9M)

Contractor: Walter's Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2001-11-27

End Date: 2012-03-31

Contract Duration: 3,777 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Place of Performance

Location: TINKER AFB, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73145

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.9 million to WALTER'S SERVICES, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value of $11.9M over 3777 days suggests a moderate annual spend. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract's duration and fixed-price nature may mitigate cost overrun risks. 4. Performance is rated 'OK', suggesting satisfactory delivery of services. 5. The contract falls under 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation', a niche but essential service area. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $11.9M spread over approximately 10 years results in an average annual spend of roughly $1.2M. Without specific benchmarks for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation', it's challenging to definitively assess value for money. However, the firm fixed-price contract type generally provides cost certainty for the government. The 'OK' performance rating suggests the contractor is meeting expectations, but doesn't indicate exceptional value.

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 broad solicitation, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause suggests specific criteria were applied that may have limited the pool of eligible bidders. The number of bidders is not specified, making it difficult to fully assess the intensity of competition. However, the 'full and open' designation implies a structured procurement process.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging a wider range of offers, which can lead to more competitive pricing and better value. However, the exclusion of sources element warrants further investigation to ensure no potentially lower-cost or higher-quality providers were unduly excluded.

Public Impact

The Department of the Air Force benefits from essential support services for its air transportation operations. This contract ensures the continuity of critical logistical and operational functions related to air mobility. The services provided likely support military readiness and deployment capabilities. The contract's impact is primarily within the defense sector, supporting national security objectives.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • The 'after exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type could indicate a non-standard or potentially restrictive bidding process.
  • The 'OK' performance rating is satisfactory but does not guarantee optimal service delivery or identify areas for improvement.
  • Lack of specific details on the services rendered makes it difficult to assess the full scope and impact of the contract.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a structured and potentially competitive procurement.
  • The firm fixed-price contract type offers cost predictability for the government.
  • The contract has been active for a significant duration, implying a stable and ongoing need for these services.

Sector Analysis

The 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' sector encompasses a range of services crucial for the efficient operation of airfields and air logistics. This includes ground support, maintenance coordination, and other ancillary services. While specific market size data for this niche is not readily available, it is an integral part of the broader aerospace and defense industry. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more granular service definitions, but contracts of this value are common within large federal agencies like the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside, as indicated by 'sb': false. Consequently, there are no explicit subcontracting requirements mandated for small businesses within this award. This means that WALTER'S SERVICES, INC. has the discretion to manage subcontracting, and opportunities for small businesses may be limited unless proactively sought by the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Department of the Air Force contracting and program management offices. The 'OK' performance rating suggests ongoing monitoring. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, but detailed performance reports or Inspector General involvement are not explicitly mentioned. Accountability is primarily driven by the firm fixed-price terms and performance ratings.

Related Government Programs

  • Air Transportation Services
  • Logistics Support Contracts
  • Defense Support Services
  • Base Operations Support

Risk Flags

  • Competition Clause Ambiguity
  • Performance Rating Below 'Exceptional'

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, air-force, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, support-activities, air-transportation, long-term-contract, service-contract, oklahoma

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.9 million to WALTER'S SERVICES, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WALTER'S SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2001-11-27. End: 2012-03-31.

What specific services are included under 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' for this contract?

The provided data does not detail the specific services rendered under this contract beyond the general category of 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation'. This category can encompass a wide array of functions, potentially including ground handling, aircraft servicing, air traffic control support, ramp operations, cargo handling, passenger services, and facility maintenance related to air transportation. A more granular understanding of the services would require accessing the contract's statement of work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS). Without this detail, it's difficult to assess the precise nature of the support provided to the Department of the Air Force.

How does the $11.9M contract value compare to similar contracts for air transportation support within the DoD?

Comparing the $11.9M total contract value requires context regarding the duration and scope of services. Awarded in 2001 and ending in 2012, the contract spanned over 10 years, averaging approximately $1.2M annually. Without access to a database of comparable contracts for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' within the DoD, a direct benchmark is difficult. However, for large-scale support activities, this annual figure appears moderate. The firm fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope, and the 'OK' performance rating indicates satisfactory execution, implying the value was likely commensurate with the services delivered, though not necessarily exceptional.

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

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally favored for their cost certainty. However, for a contract spanning over 10 years, risks can emerge. If the initial price was not accurately estimated based on future economic conditions (inflation, material costs), the contractor might face reduced profit margins or, in extreme cases, financial strain. Conversely, if the scope of work was underestimated, the government might be paying more than necessary for the actual services rendered. The 'OK' performance rating suggests these risks were managed, but the long duration necessitates careful monitoring of the contractor's ability to maintain service quality and cost control throughout the contract lifecycle.

What does the 'OK' performance rating signify in terms of contractor accountability?

An 'OK' performance rating signifies that the contractor, WALTER'S SERVICES, INC., has met the minimum requirements and standards outlined in the contract. It indicates satisfactory performance but does not suggest exceptional service delivery or exceeding expectations. In terms of accountability, this rating implies that the government has found the contractor's performance to be acceptable, fulfilling their contractual obligations without significant deficiencies. However, it also suggests there may be room for improvement, and the government should continue to monitor performance closely to ensure continued compliance and identify any potential issues before they escalate.

What is the historical spending trend for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' within the Department of the Air Force?

The provided data focuses on a single contract award from 2001-2012. To understand historical spending trends for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' within the Department of the Air Force, a broader analysis of multiple contracts over a longer period would be necessary. This would involve examining annual spending patterns, identifying major contract vehicles, and tracking the evolution of service requirements and costs. Without this comprehensive data, it's impossible to ascertain whether this $11.9M contract represents a typical, increasing, or decreasing portion of the Air Force's overall expenditure in this category.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and WarehousingSupport Activities for Air TransportationOther Support Activities for Air Transportation

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENTMAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 316 SENATE ST # 20, COLUMBIA, SC, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2001-11-27

Current End Date: 2012-03-31

Potential End Date: 2012-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2012-06-22

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending