GSA awards $30.9M contract for architectural services to Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,943,404 ($30.9M)

Contractor: Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2009-01-05

End Date: 2014-06-30

Contract Duration: 2,002 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NOT APPLICABLE

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20407

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $30.9 million to HAYES, SEAY, MATTERN & MATTERN, INC. for work described as: NOT APPLICABLE Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating a clear understanding of scope and cost. 2. The contract was not competitively bid, raising questions about potential price discovery. 3. Services provided are architectural, a critical component for public infrastructure development. 4. The duration of the contract (2002 days) suggests a significant project timeline. 5. The contract was awarded by the General Services Administration, a key federal procurement agency. 6. The geographic focus is Washington D.C., impacting local infrastructure and development.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $30.9 million architectural services contract is challenging without comparable data for similar projects within the GSA or across federal agencies. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests cost certainty, but the lack of competition makes it difficult to assess if the pricing represents optimal value for money. Further analysis would require comparing the scope of services and deliverables against industry standards and other federal architectural contracts to determine if the price paid was competitive.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a sole-source or not available for competition basis. This means that only one contractor, Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc., was considered eligible or available to perform the required architectural services. The absence of a competitive bidding process limits the opportunity for multiple firms to propose solutions and potentially offer lower prices or innovative approaches. This procurement method is typically used when specific expertise or circumstances justify bypassing full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition means taxpayers may not have benefited from the cost savings that could arise from a competitive bidding process. Without multiple bids, it's harder to ensure the government secured the best possible price for these architectural services.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring architectural design and planning services benefit from the expertise of Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. The contract supports the development and maintenance of public buildings and infrastructure, primarily within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. The project likely involves a team of architects, engineers, and support staff, contributing to employment in the architectural services sector. Improved public facilities and infrastructure in the nation's capital are a direct outcome of such contracts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competitive bidding may have led to a higher price than could have been achieved through open competition.
The sole-source nature of the award raises concerns about transparency and fairness in the procurement process.
The significant dollar value of the contract warrants close scrutiny of performance and deliverables to ensure value for money.

Positive Signals

The contract is with an established firm, Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc., suggesting a level of expertise and reliability.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The services are essential for public infrastructure development, indicating a clear need and purpose for the contract.

Sector Analysis

Architectural services fall under the broader professional, scientific, and technical services sector. This sector is characterized by specialized expertise and project-based work. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services, particularly for designing and overseeing the construction and renovation of public buildings and infrastructure. The market for architectural services is competitive, but specific projects may require specialized skills or unique qualifications that lead to sole-source awards. The total federal spending on architectural services can fluctuate based on infrastructure needs and construction cycles.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, the 'ss' value is also false, suggesting it was not awarded under a small business set-aside program. This means that Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc., is likely not a small business, or if they are, the contract was not specifically designated for small business participation. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by this specific award, nor is there an immediate positive impact on the small business ecosystem through set-asides.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. Mechanisms for oversight would include contract performance monitoring, regular progress reports from the contractor, and potentially site inspections. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms and conditions of the firm-fixed-price contract, with penalties or remedies for non-performance. Transparency might be limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, but contract award data is generally publicly available through federal procurement databases.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Design and Construction
Public Infrastructure Projects
Architectural and Engineering Services
General Services Administration Procurement

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Potential for cost overruns if scope is not well-defined.
Limited transparency due to non-competitive nature.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $30.9 million to HAYES, SEAY, MATTERN & MATTERN, INC.. NOT APPLICABLE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HAYES, SEAY, MATTERN & MATTERN, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-01-05. End: 2014-06-30.

What is the track record of Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. with federal contracts?

Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. (HSMM) has a history of performing federal contracts, primarily through the General Services Administration (GSA). While specific details on past performance metrics for this particular $30.9 million architectural services contract are not provided in the abbreviated data, HSMM's longevity and engagement with federal agencies suggest a capacity to meet contractual obligations. A comprehensive review would involve examining their performance history on other GSA contracts, including on-time delivery, quality of work, and adherence to budget, as well as any past performance evaluations or disputes. Their continued selection for federal work implies a generally satisfactory performance record, though specific project outcomes can vary.

How does the $30.9 million contract value compare to similar architectural services contracts awarded by the GSA?

Without access to a comprehensive database of GSA architectural services contracts, a direct comparison of the $30.9 million value is difficult. However, architectural services for major public buildings and infrastructure projects can range significantly in cost, from hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of dollars, depending on the project's scale, complexity, and duration. Given that this contract spans over 2000 days and is for services in the District of Columbia, a major hub for federal facilities, the $30.9 million figure appears substantial but not necessarily outside the expected range for significant federal architectural engagements. A more precise benchmark would require analyzing contracts with similar scope, location, and project type awarded within a comparable timeframe.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for architectural services?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for architectural services include potential overpayment due to the lack of competitive pricing, limited innovation from a single provider, and reduced transparency in the procurement process. Taxpayers may not receive the best value for their money if competition could have driven down costs. Furthermore, reliance on a single contractor can create risks if that contractor experiences performance issues, financial instability, or faces unforeseen challenges, as there are no immediate alternative providers readily available under the existing award. The government also misses out on the potential for diverse perspectives and creative solutions that often emerge from a competitive environment.

How effective are firm-fixed-price contracts in managing costs for architectural services?

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally considered effective in managing costs for architectural services when the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly. Under an FFP contract, the contractor assumes most of the risk for cost overruns, providing the government with cost certainty. This structure incentivizes the contractor to control costs efficiently to maximize profit. However, if the project scope is poorly defined or subject to frequent changes, an FFP contract can lead to disputes or require costly change orders. For architectural services, where design evolution is common, careful initial scope definition and robust change management processes are crucial for the FFP structure to be truly effective in cost control.

What is the typical duration for federal architectural services contracts of this magnitude?

The typical duration for federal architectural services contracts can vary widely based on the project's complexity and the agency's needs. A contract duration of 2002 days, as indicated for this $30.9 million award, translates to approximately 5.5 years. This is a considerable length of time, suggesting a large-scale, long-term project such as the design and oversight of a major federal building, a complex renovation, or a multi-phase infrastructure development. Shorter-term architectural needs might be fulfilled within 1-3 years, while very large or phased projects could extend beyond this duration. The extended timeline here likely reflects the comprehensive nature of the architectural services required.

What does the NAICS code 541310 signify for this contract?

The NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) code 541310 signifies that the primary business activity for this contract is 'Architectural Services.' This code specifically covers establishments primarily engaged in planning and designing residential, institutional, leisure, commercial, and industrial buildings and structures. It encompasses services such as architectural design, preparing construction documents, construction management, and site supervision. For this contract, it confirms that the core service being procured from Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. is the professional expertise involved in the architectural design and planning phases of a project, aligning with the contract's stated purpose.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: GS-11P-09-MK-C-0019

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM (UEI: 153561212)

Address: 109 NORFOLK AVE, ROANOKE, VA, 06

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,943,404

Exercised Options: $30,943,404

Current Obligation: $30,943,404

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline