Department of Defense awards $14.5M contract for landscaping services, raising questions about value and competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,575,841 ($14.6M)

Contractor: Fuji Construction, K.K.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-10-01

End Date: 2008-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,191 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200303!000051!5700!RB03 !18 CONS/LGC MGMT ANLY & SPT FLGT!F6232102C0003 !A!N! !Y!P00008 !20021001!20030930!691150205!691150205!691150205!N!FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K. !10-67, HINODEMACHI !MATSUYAMA !JA!790-0!* !* !JA!* !* !JAPAN !+000001965555!N!N!000000000000!S208!LANDSCAPING/GROUNDSKEEPING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !3000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !561730!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B! ! !N!Z!A!N!J!2!004!B! !Z!N!Z!B !JA!Y!L!U! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.6 million to FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K. for work described as: 200303!000051!5700!RB03 !18 CONS/LGC MGMT ANLY & SPT FLGT!F6232102C0003 !A!N! !Y!P00008 !20021001!20030930!691150205!691150205!691150205!N!FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K. !10-67, HINODEMACHI !MATSUYAMA !JA!790-0!* !* !JA!* !* … Key points: 1. Contract value appears high relative to the scope of landscaping services. 2. Limited information on competition dynamics makes it difficult to assess price fairness. 3. The contract duration of nearly 6 years warrants scrutiny for potential cost overruns. 4. Performance context is missing, hindering an evaluation of contractor effectiveness. 5. This contract represents a small portion of overall defense spending but highlights potential inefficiencies. 6. The lack of specific performance metrics makes oversight challenging.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The awarded amount of $14.5 million for landscaping services over a period of almost six years seems disproportionately high. Without detailed breakdowns of services provided or comparable contract data, it is difficult to benchmark the value for money. The contract's duration also raises concerns about potential cost escalation and whether a more frequent, shorter-term contract might have yielded better pricing or allowed for more frequent performance reviews.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely solicited. However, the number of bids received and the specific details of the bidding process are not readily available. This lack of transparency regarding the competitive landscape makes it challenging to determine if the competition effectively drove down prices or if there were any limiting factors that prevented broader participation.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers, the absence of detailed competition metrics prevents a definitive assessment of whether the government secured the best possible price.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K., the awarded contractor. Services delivered include landscaping and groundskeeping, likely for a Department of the Air Force installation. The geographic impact is localized to the area where the services are performed in Japan. Workforce implications would involve local hires for landscaping and maintenance tasks.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

High contract value for landscaping services.
Extended contract duration without clear performance benchmarks.
Lack of transparency in the competitive bidding process details.
Potential for cost overruns due to long performance period.
Limited public information on the specific services required.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition.
Contractor is a known entity in Japan.
Clear start and end dates for service delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, specifically grounds maintenance. The market for landscaping and groundskeeping services is diverse, ranging from small local businesses to larger corporations. Federal spending in this area typically supports military bases, government facilities, and public lands. Benchmarking this contract's value against similar large-scale landscaping contracts for federal installations is difficult without more specific service details, but the awarded amount appears substantial for the stated service category.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. Given the contract's value and the nature of the services, it is unlikely that small businesses were the primary focus, though they could potentially participate as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities were mandated or actively pursued.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. Standard Department of Defense contracting procedures would typically involve contract officers, performance monitors, and potentially an Inspector General's office for audits and investigations. Transparency is limited by the lack of publicly available performance reports or detailed service statements.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support Services
Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Groundskeeping Services
Department of Defense Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

High contract value for landscaping services.
Extended contract duration.
Lack of detailed performance metrics.
Limited transparency on competition specifics.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.6 million to FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K.. 200303!000051!5700!RB03 !18 CONS/LGC MGMT ANLY & SPT FLGT!F6232102C0003 !A!N! !Y!P00008 !20021001!20030930!691150205!691150205!691150205!N!FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K. !10-67, HINODEMACHI !MATSUYAMA !JA!790-0!* !* !JA!* !* !JAPAN !+000001965555!N!N!000000000000!S208!LANDSCAPING/GROUNDSKEEPING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !3000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !561730!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K..

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 $14.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-10-01. End: 2008-09-30.

What specific landscaping and groundskeeping services were included in this $14.5 million contract?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'LANDSCAPING/GROUNDSKEEPING SERVICES' (NAICS 561730). However, the specific deliverables, such as the scope of grounds maintenance, horticultural services, irrigation system upkeep, snow removal (if applicable in Japan), or specialized landscape design and installation, are not detailed. The broad categorization makes it difficult to ascertain if the $14.5 million value is justified solely by routine maintenance or if it includes significant capital improvements or specialized horticultural programs. Further documentation would be required to understand the precise nature and extent of the services contracted.

How does the per-year cost of this contract compare to similar landscaping contracts at Department of Defense facilities?

The contract spans 2191 days, approximately 5.99 years, with a total value of $14,575,841.41. This equates to an average annual cost of roughly $2.43 million. Benchmarking this against similar contracts is challenging without knowing the specific location, size of the facility, climate, and the exact scope of services. However, for general landscaping and groundskeeping, this annual figure appears on the higher end, especially if it primarily covers routine maintenance. Contracts for large military installations with extensive grounds and diverse horticultural needs might approach this cost, but without comparative data points or a detailed service breakdown, it's difficult to definitively assess value. The 'NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED' field for 'PRICE ESTIMATED FOR CONTRACT' further complicates a direct comparison.

What was the competitive landscape for this contract, and how many bids were received?

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' (CT = 'C'). This designation implies that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. However, the data does not specify the number of bids received (NO = 4). While four bidders suggest some level of competition, it is not exceptionally robust for a contract of this magnitude. A more thorough analysis would require knowing if the solicitation reached a wide audience and if the four bids represented a diverse range of capable contractors. The limited number could indicate potential barriers to entry or a lack of widespread interest, which might impact price discovery.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the contractor's performance?

The provided data does not include any specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or metrics for evaluating FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K.'s performance. Standard government contracts typically outline performance standards, quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs), and metrics for evaluating service delivery. The absence of this information in the summary data suggests that either these details are not captured in this particular data feed or they were not clearly defined or emphasized in the contract documentation. Without defined KPIs, assessing the contractor's effectiveness and ensuring accountability for the $14.5 million expenditure becomes significantly more difficult for the government.

Are there any known issues or past performance concerns with FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K. on previous government contracts?

The provided data does not contain specific information regarding the past performance record or any known issues with FUJI CONSTRUCTION, K.K. on previous government contracts. While the contract was awarded under full and open competition, and the contractor is identified, details about their track record, such as past performance evaluations, past disputes, or contract terminations, are not included. A comprehensive risk assessment would typically involve reviewing the contractor's performance history with the government or other clients to identify any red flags or confirm a history of successful contract completion.

What is the historical spending trend for landscaping services by the Department of the Air Force, and how does this contract fit?

The provided data focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending trends for landscaping services by the Department of the Air Force (DAF). To understand the context, one would need to analyze aggregate spending data over several fiscal years for NAICS code 561730 or similar service categories across the DAF. This single contract of $14.5 million represents a significant expenditure for landscaping. Without historical data, it's impossible to determine if this is an outlier, a consistent level of investment, or an increase/decrease compared to previous years. Analyzing historical patterns would reveal if the DAF consistently uses large, long-term contracts for these services or prefers smaller, more frequent awards.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Services to Buildings and Dwellings › Landscaping Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 10-67, HINODEMACHI, MATSUYAMA

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline