DoD's $11.8M AOAP RE-COMPETE contract awarded to Altus, LLC, with a significant portion allocated to Alabama

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,842,093 ($11.8M)

Contractor: Altus, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-02-25

End Date: 2025-10-15

Contract Duration: 1,328 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: AOAP RE-COMPETE

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.8 million to ALTUS, LLC for work described as: AOAP RE-COMPETE Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the fixed-price nature of the contract, though detailed cost breakdowns are not publicly available. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open competition after exclusion of sources, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with a contract duration of over three years and a fixed-price structure. 4. Performance context is tied to testing laboratories and services, a critical function for defense readiness. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader defense testing and evaluation services market.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of approximately $11.8 million over its period of performance suggests a moderate investment. Benchmarking against similar testing and laboratory services contracts is challenging without more granular data on the specific services rendered. However, the firm fixed-price (FFP) award type generally aims to provide cost certainty for the government, implying an expectation of value if the contractor meets performance requirements.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while sources were initially excluded, the subsequent competition was open to all eligible bidders. The presence of 2 bids suggests a reasonable level of competition, which typically aids in price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process, even with initial source exclusions, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple firms to offer their best pricing and technical solutions.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from essential testing and laboratory services, crucial for maintaining operational readiness. This contract supports specialized technical services, likely involving skilled personnel and advanced equipment. The contract's performance location is indicated by the state code 'AL' (Alabama), suggesting a geographic concentration of work. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for scientists, technicians, and support staff in the Alabama region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs, despite the FFP structure.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical testing services could pose a risk if performance falters.
Limited transparency into the specific cost components of the testing services provided.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price award type provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition after exclusion of sources suggests a structured and potentially fair bidding process.
Contract duration allows for sustained service delivery and potential for building contractor expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader defense sector, specifically focusing on testing laboratories and services. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized capabilities to government agencies. Spending in this area is critical for ensuring the reliability and effectiveness of military equipment and systems. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the aggregate expenditure on similar testing and evaluation contracts across the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications mandated by small business set-asides. The impact on the small business ecosystem would be indirect, depending on whether Altus, LLC, voluntarily engages small businesses as subcontractors or partners.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Army, which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance with contract terms. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, linking payment to successful delivery. Transparency is generally limited for specific contract details beyond what is publicly reported, though internal agency oversight mechanisms would be in place. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Research and Development
Defense Logistics Agency Services
Army Test and Evaluation Command Contracts
Aerospace Testing Services
Military Equipment Testing

Risk Flags

Potential for reduced competition due to source exclusion.
Long contract duration may lead to performance degradation or market misalignment.
Limited public visibility into specific cost breakdowns for services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.8 million to ALTUS, LLC. AOAP RE-COMPETE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALTUS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-02-25. End: 2025-10-15.

What is the historical spending pattern for AOAP RE-COMPETE or similar testing services by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending for the 'AOAP RE-COMPETE' specifically requires access to detailed contract databases and procurement histories. However, the broader category of 'Testing Laboratories and Services' (NAICS 541380) consistently represents a significant expenditure for the Department of Defense. Over the past decade, federal agencies, including the Army, have allocated billions of dollars annually to testing and evaluation services to ensure the efficacy and safety of military equipment and systems. This includes a wide range of activities from materials testing to complex system validation. The 'AOAP RE-COMPETE' contract, valued at approximately $11.8 million, represents a specific instance within this larger spending trend. Without more granular data on prior AOAP contracts or comparable re-competed services, it's difficult to pinpoint precise historical spending trends for this exact service line, but it aligns with the consistent investment in defense readiness.

How does the awarded price of $11.8 million compare to market rates for similar testing and laboratory services?

Benchmarking the $11.8 million contract value against market rates for similar testing and laboratory services is challenging without specific details on the scope of work, duration, and complexity of the services provided by Altus, LLC. The contract is a firm fixed-price definitive contract, awarded after a full and open competition with two bids received. The firm fixed-price nature suggests that the government sought cost certainty. To perform a robust comparison, one would need to identify comparable contracts with similar service descriptions, geographic locations, and contract types. Factors such as the specific types of tests, the level of expertise required, equipment utilization, and reporting standards all influence pricing. Given the competitive bidding process, it can be inferred that the awarded price was considered reasonable by the contracting officers relative to the proposals received. However, a definitive assessment of value-for-money requires a deeper dive into the specific deliverables and market conditions at the time of award.

What is Altus, LLC's track record with government contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Altus, LLC has a history of receiving government contracts, primarily within the Department of Defense. Publicly available data indicates that the company has been awarded multiple contracts across various agencies, including the Department of the Army. These contracts often fall within the realm of professional, scientific, and technical services, aligning with the nature of the AOAP RE-COMPETE contract. While specific performance metrics for past contracts are not always readily accessible, the continued award of contracts suggests a satisfactory performance history and a demonstrated capability to meet government requirements. Further due diligence would involve examining past performance evaluations, any reported disputes or claims, and the overall volume and value of contracts previously awarded to Altus, LLC by federal agencies.

What are the potential risks associated with a definitive contract of this duration (over 3 years)?

Definitive contracts, especially those with a duration exceeding three years like the AOAP RE-COMPETE (ending October 2025, initiated February 2022), carry inherent risks for both the government and the contractor. For the government, a primary risk is the potential for the contractor's performance to degrade over time or for the contractor to become complacent due to the long-term commitment. Market conditions, technological advancements, or changes in government requirements could also render the contracted services less optimal or cost-effective by the contract's end. Conversely, the contractor faces risks related to fluctuating labor costs, material price increases, and the possibility of unforeseen operational challenges. The firm fixed-price nature mitigates some of the government's cost risk, but it places the burden of managing these long-term operational and market uncertainties squarely on the contractor. Effective contract management, regular performance reviews, and clear communication channels are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How does the 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type affect price discovery and taxpayer value?

The contract type 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' introduces a nuanced dynamic to price discovery. Initially, certain potential sources were excluded from bidding, which could theoretically limit the pool of competitors. However, the subsequent 'full and open' phase implies that all *remaining* eligible sources were invited to compete. The impact on price discovery depends heavily on why sources were excluded and how many remained. If only a few sources were excluded for legitimate, documented reasons (e.g., lack of specific certifications, past performance issues), and a robust number of bidders remained, competition could still be effective. If, however, the exclusion significantly narrowed the field, it might reduce competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher prices than if all potential sources had participated. For taxpayers, this means that while a competitive process occurred, the degree of price discovery and the resulting value for money might be slightly less optimized compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition, depending on the specifics of the source exclusion.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1101 MAIN STREET, DARLINGTON, MD, 21034

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,124,410

Exercised Options: $11,842,093

Current Obligation: $11,842,093

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline