DoD awards $12.4M facilities support contract to Techflow Mission Support, LLC for recurring work

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,381,825 ($12.4M)

Contractor: Techflow Mission Support, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-07-01

End Date: 2026-06-30

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $34.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: RECURRING WORK FOR OPTION YEAR FOUR

Place of Performance

Location: PATUXENT RIVER, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20670

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.4 million to TECHFLOW MISSION SUPPORT, LLC for work described as: RECURRING WORK FOR OPTION YEAR FOUR Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is for facilities support services, a critical but often overlooked area of government operations. 3. The duration of the base period is one year, with potential for option years. 4. The award is a delivery order against a larger contract vehicle. 5. The contractor, Techflow Mission Support, LLC, is based in Maryland. 6. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12.4 million for one year of facilities support services appears reasonable given the scope of recurring work. Benchmarking against similar facilities support contracts across the Department of Defense would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure is generally favorable for the government as it caps costs. However, without detailed service level agreements and performance metrics, a definitive value assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this method generally fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The use of full and open competition is the government's preferred method for procurement, aiming to achieve the best value for taxpayer dollars.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically leads to more competitive pricing, potentially saving taxpayer money compared to sole-source or limited competition awards. It ensures a wider pool of contractors can compete, driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from consistent and reliable facilities support services, ensuring operational readiness. Services include maintenance, repair, and potentially other facility management functions essential for military installations. The geographic impact is centered around the specific Navy installation(s) where the services are rendered. This contract supports jobs within the facilities management and support services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics or service level agreements in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the quality of services.
The recurring nature of the work could lead to complacency if not actively managed and reviewed.
Potential for scope creep if not clearly defined within the contract's statement of work.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract supports essential operational functions for the Department of Defense.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services fall under the broader professional, scientific, and technical services sector. This sector is characterized by a mix of large, established companies and numerous small businesses. Government contracts for facilities management are substantial, driven by the extensive real estate holdings of federal agencies. Benchmarking against similar contracts would involve looking at spending in NAICS code 561210 across various federal agencies, with the Department of Defense being a significant consumer.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb fields) is false for this specific award. This suggests that the contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have explicit subcontracting requirements for small businesses detailed in this award notice. Further review of the contract vehicle and its associated small business subcontracting plan would be necessary to understand the full impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contract administration office within the Department of the Navy. Performance monitoring, invoice review, and ensuring compliance with contract terms are key oversight functions. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Navy Base Operations Support
Government Facilities Management Services
Recurring Service Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for service quality degradation over time if not actively managed.
Risk of price escalation in future contract periods.
Dependence on contractor's financial and operational stability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.4 million to TECHFLOW MISSION SUPPORT, LLC. RECURRING WORK FOR OPTION YEAR FOUR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TECHFLOW MISSION SUPPORT, 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 $12.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-07-01. End: 2026-06-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for facilities support services by the Department of the Navy?

The Department of the Navy, like other branches of the DoD, consistently spends significant amounts on facilities support services. This includes a wide range of activities such as maintenance, repair, custodial services, groundskeeping, and security for its vast network of bases and installations. Historical data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would reveal multi-billion dollar annual expenditures in this category. Spending often fluctuates based on infrastructure needs, modernization projects, and operational tempo. Analyzing trends over the past 5-10 years would show whether spending is increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable, and identify key contractors and service types that dominate the spending landscape.

How does the per-unit cost of services under this contract compare to industry benchmarks?

Determining the precise per-unit cost for this contract is challenging without a detailed breakdown of the services provided and their associated quantities or metrics (e.g., cost per square foot maintained, cost per repair call). Facilities support services encompass a broad spectrum of activities. However, general industry benchmarks for facility maintenance and management can be consulted. For instance, organizations like BOMA International provide data on operating costs per square foot for various building types. Comparing the total contract value against the estimated square footage or scope of services at a specific installation could offer a rough comparison. A firm-fixed-price contract shifts this benchmarking challenge more towards the contractor during the bidding phase.

What is Techflow Mission Support, LLC's track record with federal contracts, particularly within the DoD?

Techflow Mission Support, LLC has a track record of performing federal contracts, primarily within the Department of Defense. A review of their contract history would likely show awards for various support services, potentially including facilities management, logistics, and base operations. Analyzing past performance ratings, any contract disputes, or past performance evaluations would provide insight into their reliability and quality of service. Understanding their experience with similar firm-fixed-price, full-and-open competition awards is also relevant. Their presence in Maryland suggests a focus on East Coast installations, which are numerous within the DoD.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this facilities support contract?

While the provided award data does not specify Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), successful facilities support contracts typically include metrics related to response times for maintenance requests, completion rates for scheduled preventive maintenance, facility condition assessments, energy efficiency targets, and customer satisfaction surveys. For a firm-fixed-price contract, the government's primary KPI is often ensuring that all contracted services are delivered reliably and meet the required standards without cost overruns. The contracting officer's representative (COR) is usually responsible for monitoring these KPIs and ensuring contractor performance aligns with the contract's statement of work and performance standards.

Are there any specific risks associated with relying on a single contractor for recurring facilities support services?

Relying on a single contractor for recurring facilities support services, even one selected through full and open competition, carries inherent risks. One primary risk is potential contractor complacency over time, leading to a decline in service quality if performance is not rigorously monitored. Another risk is the potential for price increases in future contract renewals or option periods, especially if competition diminishes or the contractor gains significant leverage. Furthermore, if the contractor experiences financial instability or operational issues, it could lead to disruptions in essential services, impacting the agency's mission. Robust oversight and clear performance standards are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 301 A STREET, IDAHO FALLS, ID, 83402

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,729,143

Exercised Options: $17,729,143

Current Obligation: $12,381,825

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247021D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline