Air Force awards $6.1M for PMEL services, with Science & Management Resources Inc. securing the contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,112,049 ($6.1M)

Contractor: Science & Management Resources Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-02-01

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 606 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: AIR FORCE PRECISION MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT LABORATORY (PMEL) SERVICES AT MCCONNELL, MOODY, OFFUTT, AND TYNDALL

Place of Performance

Location: MOODY AFB, LOWNDES County, GEORGIA, 31699

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $6.1 million to SCIENCE & MANAGEMENT RESOURCES INC for work described as: AIR FORCE PRECISION MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT LABORATORY (PMEL) SERVICES AT MCCONNELL, MOODY, OFFUTT, AND TYNDALL Key points: 1. The contract focuses on essential precision measurement equipment laboratory services, critical for maintaining military readiness. 2. Competition was conducted under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' suggesting a specific justification for the procurement method. 3. The contract duration of 606 days indicates a medium-term need for these specialized services. 4. The award value of approximately $6.1 million is spread across four delivery orders. 5. The primary contractor, Science & Management Resources Inc., has experience in similar technical support services. 6. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 7. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 811219 points to a niche market for equipment repair and maintenance.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract requires more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar PMEL service contracts. The firm fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope, but without specific performance metrics or historical cost data, assessing true value-for-money is challenging. The award amount appears reasonable for specialized technical services supporting multiple Air Force bases, but further analysis of labor rates and overhead would be needed for a definitive assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This specific procurement method implies that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources were excluded, possibly due to specific technical requirements, prior performance, or other justifications. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'exclusion of sources' language suggests a potentially narrower competitive field than a standard full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The 'exclusion of sources' approach may limit the potential for the lowest possible price if it restricts the number of capable bidders. Taxpayers benefit from specialized services being procured, but the exact cost savings compared to a fully open process are not immediately clear without further details on the exclusion rationale.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force units at McConnell, Moody, Offutt, and Tyndall Air Force Bases, ensuring their critical measurement equipment is calibrated and maintained. Services delivered include the calibration, maintenance, and repair of precision measurement equipment essential for flight operations, weapons systems, and other critical Air Force functions. The geographic impact is concentrated at the four specified Air Force bases across different regions of the United States. This contract supports a specialized technical workforce, likely requiring skilled technicians with expertise in metrology and electronic equipment repair.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition method warrants scrutiny to ensure it was fully justified and did not unduly limit competition.
Lack of detailed cost breakdowns makes it difficult to fully assess the value-for-money proposition.
The contract duration and delivery order structure could lead to potential scope creep if not managed carefully.

Positive Signals

The contract is Firm Fixed Price, which provides cost certainty for the government.
The services are critical for maintaining the operational readiness of Air Force assets.
The contractor, Science & Management Resources Inc., is likely experienced in providing these specialized technical services.

Sector Analysis

The Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory (PMEL) services sector is a specialized niche within the broader defense support services industry. This contract falls under the category of technical maintenance and calibration services, which are essential for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of military equipment. The market size for such specialized services is relatively small, dominated by a few key players with the requisite technical expertise and security clearances. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other government contracts for similar metrology and calibration services across different branches of the military.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside (ss=false, sb=false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by this specific award. The primary contractor, Science & Management Resources Inc., is likely a mid-to-large-sized business. The absence of a set-aside means that opportunities for small businesses would primarily arise if the prime contractor voluntarily chooses to subcontract, which is not indicated in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the contracting officer and the relevant Air Force program management office at each base. The Firm Fixed Price contract type provides a degree of accountability by shifting cost overruns to the contractor. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, but detailed performance reports and specific oversight mechanisms are not publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

DoD Metrology and Calibration Services
Air Force Maintenance and Repair Contracts
Precision Measurement Equipment Support
Defense Technical Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Competition Method Justification
Contractor Performance History
Value-for-Money Assessment

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $6.1 million to SCIENCE & MANAGEMENT RESOURCES INC. AIR FORCE PRECISION MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT LABORATORY (PMEL) SERVICES AT MCCONNELL, MOODY, OFFUTT, AND TYNDALL

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE & MANAGEMENT RESOURCES 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 $6.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-02-01. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the track record of Science & Management Resources Inc. in performing similar PMEL services for the Department of Defense?

A thorough review of Science & Management Resources Inc.'s past performance is crucial for assessing their capability to successfully execute this contract. This would involve examining their contract history with the DoD, specifically looking for prior awards related to PMEL services, metrology, calibration, and electronic equipment maintenance. Key indicators to evaluate include on-time delivery, adherence to quality standards, customer satisfaction ratings (if available), and any history of contract disputes or terminations. While the provided data indicates they are the awardee, detailed insights into their specific experience and success rate in comparable roles would strengthen the assessment of their reliability for this $6.1 million contract.

How does the awarded price compare to industry benchmarks for similar PMEL services?

Directly comparing the awarded price of $6.1 million to industry benchmarks for PMEL services is challenging without more granular data. Benchmarking would ideally involve analyzing the average cost per calibration, the cost of labor rates for certified technicians, and overhead rates for similar contracts awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies. The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procurement method also complicates direct comparisons, as it may have influenced the pricing. A comprehensive value-for-money assessment would require access to detailed cost proposals or historical pricing data for comparable services to determine if this contract represents a competitive and efficient use of taxpayer funds.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?

Key risks for this contract include potential technical failures in equipment calibration leading to operational impacts, contractor performance issues (e.g., delays, quality deficiencies), and potential cost overruns if the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) structure is not adequately managed. Mitigations typically involve robust government oversight, clear performance standards outlined in the contract, regular progress reviews, and the contractor's own quality assurance processes. The FFP structure itself mitigates financial risk for the government by capping costs, but it places more pressure on the contractor to manage their expenses effectively. The 'exclusion of sources' aspect could also pose a risk if it limits the pool of qualified contractors, potentially impacting long-term service availability or innovation.

What is the historical spending pattern for PMEL services at these specific Air Force bases?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for PMEL services at McConnell, Moody, Offutt, and Tyndall Air Force Bases would provide valuable context for this $6.1 million award. This involves examining previous contracts for similar services at these locations, noting the award amounts, contract durations, and the contractors involved. Significant year-over-year increases or decreases in spending could indicate changes in operational tempo, equipment modernization, or shifts in procurement strategies. Understanding historical spending helps in assessing whether the current award is consistent with past investments or represents a notable deviation, which might warrant further investigation into the underlying reasons.

What are the implications of the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procurement method on cost and competition?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources were deliberately excluded. This exclusion could be based on factors like specialized technical capabilities, past performance, or security requirements. While it aims to ensure that only qualified entities participate, it inherently narrows the competitive pool compared to a standard full and open competition. This could potentially lead to less aggressive pricing if the excluded sources represented significant competition. The implications for cost are that the price might be higher than in a completely open market, but potentially lower than a sole-source award. The impact on competition is reduced, but still present among the included sources.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance › Other Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 9013 UNIVERSITY PARKWAY, PENSACOLA, FL, 32514

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,185,933

Exercised Options: $6,112,049

Current Obligation: $6,112,049

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA489019D1004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline