DoD's $31M facilities support contract awarded to Chugach Management Services, JV, lacked competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,174,258 ($31.2M)

Contractor: Chugach Management Services, JV

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-03-29

End Date: 2013-07-31

Contract Duration: 489 days

Daily Burn Rate: $63.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: BASE INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: KIRTLAND AFB, BERNALILLO County, NEW MEXICO, 87117, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: New Mexico Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.2 million to CHUGACH MANAGEMENT SERVICES, JV for work described as: BASE INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential overpayment and lack of market-driven pricing. 2. Limited competition suggests potential for higher costs compared to a fully competed contract. 3. The contract's duration and value indicate a significant commitment of taxpayer funds for essential base support. 4. Performance context is limited due to the lack of competitive bidding, making objective assessment challenging. 5. This contract falls within the facilities support services sector, a critical component of military base operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is difficult without competitive data. The base award amount of $31.17 million over its period of performance suggests a substantial investment in facilities maintenance. However, the lack of competition means there's no direct comparison to other providers or market rates to definitively assess if the price was optimal. Without a competitive bidding process, it's hard to ascertain if the government secured the best possible value for the services rendered.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a sole-source justification, meaning it was not competed among multiple potential vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required services, often due to unique capabilities or existing infrastructure. The absence of a competitive bidding process limits the opportunity for price discovery and may result in higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers do not benefit from the cost savings that typically arise from competitive bidding, potentially leading to less efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force and its personnel, who rely on well-maintained facilities for operational readiness. Services delivered include essential base installation maintenance and support, ensuring the functionality of critical infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to the specific Air Force base where the contract was performed in New Mexico. Workforce implications include the employment of personnel by Chugach Management Services, JV, to carry out the maintenance and support tasks.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated prices and reduced incentive for cost efficiency.
Sole-source awards can limit opportunities for innovative solutions from a broader market.
Absence of performance benchmarks from a competitive process makes evaluating contractor efficiency difficult.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded to a joint venture, potentially fostering business opportunities for participating entities.
The contract addresses essential base maintenance, ensuring operational continuity for the Air Force.

Sector Analysis

Facilities support services represent a significant segment of the government contracting market, encompassing a wide range of maintenance, repair, and operational activities for federal installations. This contract, valued at over $31 million, falls within this broad category. Comparable spending benchmarks in this sector often show a wide variance due to the diverse nature of services and geographic locations, but a contract of this size typically signifies a substantial requirement for comprehensive base support.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have significant subcontracting implications for small businesses based on the available information. The award to a joint venture (Chugach Management Services, JV) might involve internal subcontracting or resource allocation among its partners, but the direct impact on the broader small business ecosystem is not evident from this data alone.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the contracting agency, the Department of the Air Force, and potentially the Department of Defense's Inspector General. Accountability measures would be tied to the contract's performance clauses and reporting requirements. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, as public scrutiny is often higher for competed contracts.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support (BOS)
Facilities Engineering
Maintenance and Repair Services
Logistics and Support Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Potential for reduced value for taxpayer money due to lack of competition.
Limited transparency in the procurement process.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.2 million to CHUGACH MANAGEMENT SERVICES, JV. BASE INSTALLATION MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CHUGACH MANAGEMENT SERVICES, JV.

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 $31.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-03-29. End: 2013-07-31.

What is the track record of Chugach Management Services, JV with federal contracts?

Chugach Management Services, JV has a history of federal contract awards, primarily within the Department of Defense. As a joint venture, its performance is a composite of its constituent companies' capabilities and past performance. Analyzing their specific contract history, including past performance evaluations, any disputes, or contract modifications, would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and effectiveness in delivering services. Without access to detailed performance reviews and a comprehensive contract database, a definitive assessment of their track record is challenging, but their continued awards suggest a level of capability recognized by the government.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar facilities support contracts?

Direct price comparison is difficult due to the sole-source nature of this award. Typically, competitive bidding allows for price discovery and benchmarking against market rates or other awarded contracts. In the absence of competition, it's challenging to determine if the $31.17 million price tag represents optimal value. To assess pricing, one would need to compare the specific services rendered, the scope of work, and the contract type (Firm Fixed Price) against similar sole-source or competitively awarded contracts for base maintenance and support services across different agencies and geographic locations. Without such comparative data, the pricing remains an area of uncertainty regarding its cost-effectiveness.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract?

The primary risk associated with this sole-source contract is the potential for inflated costs due to the lack of competitive pressure. Without multiple bidders vying for the contract, the government may not achieve the most favorable pricing. Another risk is the potential for reduced innovation, as a sole-source award might not incentivize the contractor to explore more cost-effective or advanced solutions compared to a competitive environment. Furthermore, assessing the contractor's performance and value for money is more challenging without comparative benchmarks from a competitive process, increasing the risk of suboptimal outcomes.

How effective has this contract been in delivering base installation maintenance and support services?

The effectiveness of this contract in delivering base installation maintenance and support services is difficult to ascertain solely from the provided data. As a sole-source award, there were no competing proposals to establish performance benchmarks. Effectiveness would typically be measured through contractor performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), adherence to service level agreements, and the overall impact on base operations and readiness. Without access to these specific performance metrics and feedback, a definitive judgment on the contract's effectiveness cannot be made. The fact that it was awarded and presumably completed suggests a basic level of service delivery was met.

What are the historical spending patterns for base installation maintenance and support services at this agency?

Historical spending patterns for base installation maintenance and support services at the Department of the Air Force (part of the Department of Defense) are substantial, reflecting the extensive infrastructure requiring upkeep. This specific contract represents a portion of that spending. Analyzing broader spending trends would involve examining previous contracts for similar services, their durations, values, and whether they were competed or sole-sourced. Such an analysis could reveal patterns of reliance on specific contractors, shifts in contracting strategies (e.g., towards or away from sole-source awards), and overall budget allocations for facilities management across different bases and regions.

What is the significance of the contract type (Firm Fixed Price) in this context?

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type is significant because it places the primary risk of cost overruns on the contractor, Chugach Management Services, JV. This means the contractor is obligated to complete the work for the agreed-upon price, regardless of their actual costs. For the government, this provides cost certainty, as the total price is fixed. However, in a sole-source scenario, the 'fixed' price might not necessarily be the most competitive or cost-effective price achievable in a market. The FFP structure is generally preferred for well-defined requirements where cost risks can be reasonably estimated.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: FA940112R0003

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3800 CENTERPOINT DR STE 601, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $37,706,350

Exercised Options: $32,640,329

Current Obligation: $31,174,258

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 4

Total Subaward Amount: $174,942

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline