DoD's $15.18M contract with Federal Strategies, LLC for Range Operations Professional Development awarded via full and open competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $15,183,318 ($15.2M)
Contractor: Federal Strategies, LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2021-12-01
End Date: 2026-11-30
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $8.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: RANGE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL DEV (ROPD)
Place of Performance
Location: FREDERICKSBURG, STAFFORD County, VIRGINIA, 22406
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $15.2 million to FEDERAL STRATEGIES, LLC for work described as: RANGE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL DEV (ROPD) Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract's value of over $15 million over five years indicates a significant investment in professional development. 3. The definitive contract type suggests a flexible agreement for services over a defined period. 4. The fixed-price nature of the contract shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. Services are categorized under 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services', a broad category. 6. The contract is managed by the Department of the Navy, a major component of the DoD. 7. The contractor, Federal Strategies, LLC, is based in Virginia.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific details on the professional development services provided. The total award of $15.18 million over five years averages to approximately $3.04 million annually. This figure needs to be compared against the cost of similar professional development programs within the DoD or other federal agencies to assess value for money. The firm fixed-price contract type implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator if the price is competitive.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. While the 'full and open' aspect suggests broad solicitation, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause indicates that certain potential bidders may have been excluded prior to the main competition. This could imply specific requirements or pre-qualification criteria were applied. The presence of two bids (no: 2) suggests a limited but present level of competition.
Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging a wider range of offers and potentially driving down prices. However, the exclusion of sources might limit the full competitive benefit if it unnecessarily narrowed the field of potential bidders.
Public Impact
Personnel within the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Navy, are the primary beneficiaries of the professional development services. The contract aims to enhance the skills and capabilities of military and civilian personnel involved in range operations. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within naval installations or training areas where range operations are critical. Workforce implications include improved operational efficiency, safety, and effectiveness in range management and execution.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited competition (2 bids) may have resulted in a higher price than if more bidders had participated.
- The 'exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation to ensure it did not unduly restrict competition.
- Lack of specific details on the professional development curriculum makes it difficult to assess its direct impact and relevance.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, which generally promotes fair market pricing.
- Firm fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially protecting the government from cost overruns.
- The contract duration of five years allows for sustained development and integration of training programs.
Sector Analysis
The professional, scientific, and technical services sector is vast and encompasses a wide range of specialized expertise. This contract falls under the 'All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services' NAICS code (541990), indicating it's not easily categorized into more specific sub-sectors. Federal spending in this broad category is substantial, supporting various government functions from research and analysis to specialized training and operational support. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms capable of providing tailored solutions.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses (sb: false). The contractor, Federal Strategies, LLC, is not explicitly identified as a small business in the provided data. Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities, which are not detailed here. Without specific subcontracting plans or goals, it's difficult to assess the extent to which small businesses will benefit from this contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract structure, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, but further details on performance metrics and oversight activities would require access to internal government reporting or Inspector General reports, if any.
Related Government Programs
- DoD Training and Education Programs
- Naval Operations Support Services
- Professional Services Contracts
- Range Management and Safety Services
Risk Flags
- Limited competition (2 bids)
- Potential for restricted competition due to 'exclusion of sources' clause
- Lack of detailed service description for value assessment
Tags
department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, professional-services, training-and-education, range-operations, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, definitive-contract, virginia, scientific-and-technical-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $15.2 million to FEDERAL STRATEGIES, LLC. RANGE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL DEV (ROPD)
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is FEDERAL STRATEGIES, LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $15.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2021-12-01. End: 2026-11-30.
What specific professional development services are being provided under this contract, and how do they align with the Department of the Navy's strategic goals for range operations?
The provided data indicates the contract is for 'RANGE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL DEV (ROPD)' but lacks specific details on the curriculum or services. To assess alignment with strategic goals, one would need to review the Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Objectives (SOO) associated with the contract. These documents typically outline the required services, deliverables, and performance standards. Without them, it's presumed the development focuses on enhancing skills related to the safe, efficient, and effective management and execution of military training ranges, which are critical for readiness and operational capability. This could include areas like safety protocols, technological integration, environmental compliance, and tactical training support.
How does the $15.18 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar professional development services within the Department of the Navy or DoD?
Comparing the $15.18 million contract value requires access to historical spending data for similar professional development services within the Department of the Navy or the broader DoD. This contract, spanning 1825 days (approximately 5 years), has an average annual value of roughly $3.04 million. To benchmark this, one would need to identify comparable contracts for range operations training, military education, or specialized technical development programs. Factors such as the scope of services, number of personnel trained, duration, and contract type (e.g., fixed-price vs. cost-plus) would need to be considered for a meaningful comparison. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this represents high, low, or average spending for the services rendered.
What is the track record of Federal Strategies, LLC in delivering professional development services, particularly for government contracts?
Information regarding the specific track record of Federal Strategies, LLC in delivering professional development services, especially for government contracts, is not detailed in the provided data. A thorough assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), other federal contract awards to the company, and any publicly available information on their project history. Understanding their experience with similar scope and scale of professional development, particularly within the defense sector, would be crucial. Their success in fulfilling previous government obligations, adherence to timelines, quality of service, and client satisfaction are key indicators of their capability and reliability for this current contract.
Given the 'exclusion of sources' clause, what potential risks exist regarding the thoroughness of the competition and its impact on pricing?
The 'exclusion of sources' clause in a 'full and open competition' award introduces a potential risk that the competition may not have been as broad as initially intended. This clause implies that certain potential offerors were disqualified or excluded before the main solicitation process. The risk is that this exclusion might have limited the number of viable bidders, potentially reducing competitive pressure and leading to a less favorable price for the government than if a wider pool of bidders had been allowed to compete. To mitigate this risk, the justification for excluding sources should be robust and clearly documented, demonstrating that the exclusion was based on legitimate, objective criteria directly related to the contract requirements and not arbitrary.
What are the potential implications of the firm fixed-price contract type on contractor performance and government oversight?
A firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type generally places the primary responsibility for cost control and performance risk on the contractor. This means Federal Strategies, LLC is obligated to perform the work within the agreed-upon price, regardless of their actual costs. For the government, this offers budget certainty and protection against cost overruns, which is a significant positive. However, it also means that the government's oversight must focus heavily on ensuring the contractor meets the defined scope, quality standards, and delivery schedules. If the contractor underperforms or cuts corners to manage costs, the government's ability to seek remedies may be limited to contract termination or claims, rather than adjusting the price based on actual costs incurred. Therefore, robust performance monitoring is essential.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: M0026421R0012
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 150 RIVERSIDE PKWY, STE 206, FREDERICKSBURG, VA, 22406
Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $16,876,020
Exercised Options: $16,876,020
Current Obligation: $15,183,318
Actual Outlays: $3,323,110
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2021-12-01
Current End Date: 2026-11-30
Potential End Date: 2026-11-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-11-26
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)