DoD's $7.46M contract for shelf stocking and custodial services awarded to W. Harris, Government Services Contractor, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $7,461,339 ($7.5M)

Contractor: W. Harris, Government Services Contractor, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-02-01

End Date: 2027-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SHELF STOCKING RECEIVING STORAGE HOLDING AREA AND CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS

Place of Performance

Location: FORT MYER, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22211

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $7.5 million to W. HARRIS, GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACTOR, INC. for work described as: SHELF STOCKING RECEIVING STORAGE HOLDING AREA AND CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS Key points: 1. The contract's value of $7.46 million over five years suggests a moderate annual spend for essential support services. 2. Awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, this contract aims to control costs and provide predictable budgeting for the Defense Commissary Agency. 3. The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' indicates a specific justification for limiting the initial bidder pool. 4. The contract duration of 1825 days aligns with typical service contracts of this nature, allowing for stable service provision. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561990 points to a broad category of 'All Other Support Services'. 6. The contract's primary focus on shelf stocking and custodial operations highlights its role in maintaining operational readiness and hygiene within facilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $7.46 million over five years equates to approximately $1.49 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar support service contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to manage costs effectively. The award to a single contractor implies that the pricing was deemed acceptable at the time of award, but further analysis would be needed to confirm if it represents optimal value for money compared to potential alternatives or market rates for comparable services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' which suggests that while competition was sought, certain sources were initially excluded based on specific criteria or justifications. The data indicates 9 bidders were considered, implying a reasonably competitive process despite the exclusion. The level of competition, with 9 bidders, is generally positive for price discovery, suggesting that multiple firms were interested and capable of performing the services.

Taxpayer Impact: The competition level, while not fully open, still involved a significant number of bidders, which likely contributed to a more competitive pricing environment than a sole-source award. This helps ensure taxpayer dollars are used more efficiently by preventing excessive costs.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families benefit from well-stocked commissaries and clean facilities, enhancing their quality of life. The services delivered include essential shelf stocking, receiving, storage, holding area operations, and custodial duties. The geographic impact is primarily within the facilities managed by the Defense Commissary Agency, likely across various military installations. The contract supports jobs in the service industry, including roles for stock clerks, custodians, and potentially supervisory positions.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Exclusion of Sources' aspect of the competition warrants further scrutiny to ensure it was fully justified and did not unduly restrict competition.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's performance quality and value beyond price.
The broad NAICS code 'All Other Support Services' can sometimes mask the specific nature and complexity of the services being procured.

Positive Signals

The award to a single contractor after a competitive process suggests that the selected firm met the agency's requirements and offered a competitive price.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government, simplifying budget management.
The duration of the contract allows for consistent service delivery and reduces the administrative burden of frequent re-competition.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader support services sector, specifically catering to government facilities management and logistics. The market for such services is substantial, driven by the ongoing need for operational efficiency and maintenance across federal agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing contracts for warehousing, logistics support, and facility maintenance within the Department of Defense and other government entities. The Defense Commissary Agency's mission necessitates reliable support services to ensure its operations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb fields) was not a specific set-aside criterion for this contract. Therefore, the direct impact on small business set-asides is minimal. However, the prime contractor, W. Harris, Government Services Contractor, Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors. An analysis of subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine the extent of small business involvement and its impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and contract administration team within the Defense Commissary Agency. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, where the contractor is responsible for delivering services to specification. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Commissary Agency Operations
Government Facility Support Services
Logistics and Warehousing Contracts
Custodial and Maintenance Services
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Competition Exclusion Justification
Performance Monitoring Adequacy
Contract Scope Clarity

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $7.5 million to W. HARRIS, GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACTOR, INC.. SHELF STOCKING RECEIVING STORAGE HOLDING AREA AND CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is W. HARRIS, GOVERNMENT SERVICES CONTRACTOR, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Commissary Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $7.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-02-01. End: 2027-01-31.

What is the track record of W. Harris, Government Services Contractor, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly in support services?

W. Harris, Government Services Contractor, Inc. has a history of performing federal contracts, primarily within the support services domain. While specific details on past performance quality and scope require deeper database analysis, their repeated awards suggest a capacity to meet government requirements. Examining their contract history for similar services like logistics, maintenance, and custodial operations would provide a clearer picture of their experience and reliability. Past performance evaluations, if available, would be crucial in assessing their suitability for this current contract and their ability to deliver value.

How does the annual cost of this contract compare to similar support services procured by the DoD or other agencies?

The annual cost of approximately $1.49 million for shelf stocking, receiving, storage, holding area operations, and custodial services needs to be benchmarked against comparable contracts. Without specific details on the scope, scale, and location of services, a precise comparison is difficult. However, this figure should be evaluated against contracts for facility management, logistics support, and general maintenance services awarded by agencies of similar size and mission. Factors such as labor costs in the specific geographic regions, the intensity of services required, and the specific deliverables will influence the reasonableness of this annual spend. A thorough analysis would involve querying contract databases for similar services and comparing pricing structures and unit costs.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Key risks include potential service quality issues if performance is not adequately monitored, cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price model doesn't account for unforeseen operational challenges, and contractor performance degradation over the contract's five-year term. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust performance work statements, regular performance reviews, clear communication channels, and defined remedies for non-performance. The 'Exclusion of Sources' aspect also presents a risk if it was not fully justified, potentially limiting the best value outcome. The government's oversight and the contractor's incentive to maintain a good performance record are crucial for mitigating these risks.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' approach in ensuring value for taxpayers in this context?

This procurement method aims to balance the need for competition with specific agency requirements that might necessitate excluding certain types of offerors or limiting the initial pool. While 9 bidders participated, the exclusion implies that not all potential sources were considered. The effectiveness for taxpayers hinges on whether the exclusion was genuinely necessary and well-documented, and if the resulting competition among the remaining bidders was sufficient to drive competitive pricing. If the exclusion was arbitrary, it could lead to suboptimal pricing. Conversely, if it correctly targeted qualified vendors for a specialized need, it could ensure efficient service delivery.

What is the historical spending trend for shelf stocking, receiving, storage, holding area, and custodial operations within the Defense Commissary Agency?

Analyzing historical spending for these specific services within the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) would require access to detailed procurement data over several fiscal years. Without that granular data, it's difficult to establish a trend. However, one can infer that spending in these areas is likely consistent, driven by the ongoing operational needs of commissaries. Fluctuations might occur due to changes in facility size, operational tempo, or shifts in contracting strategies (e.g., moving from in-house to contracted services or vice-versa). Understanding past spending patterns is crucial for budget forecasting and identifying potential cost efficiencies or inflationary pressures.

What are the implications of the firm-fixed-price contract type on contractor performance and government cost control?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type shifts most of the risk to the contractor, obligating them to perform the specified services for a predetermined price, regardless of their actual costs. This provides excellent cost certainty for the government, simplifying budgeting and financial management. For contractor performance, it incentivizes efficiency and cost control on the contractor's part. However, it can also lead to potential issues if the scope is not clearly defined, as contractors may be tempted to cut corners to protect their profit margin. Conversely, it reduces the government's administrative burden in tracking contractor costs.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Other Support Services › All Other Support Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: HDEC0820R0022

Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1081 S STAR RD, STAR, ID, 83669

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,096,544

Exercised Options: $11,096,544

Current Obligation: $7,461,339

Actual Outlays: $1,305,750

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline