Department of the Army awarded $66.4M facilities support contract without competition, raising value-for-money questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $66,407,957 ($66.4M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-06-23

End Date: 2017-03-22

Contract Duration: 272 days

Daily Burn Rate: $244.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $66.4 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. The contract's value of $66.4 million for facilities support services warrants scrutiny due to the lack of competitive bidding. 2. Performance duration of 272 days suggests a short-term need, making the substantial award amount more notable. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type indicates a defined scope, but without competition, assessing price reasonableness is challenging. 4. The absence of disclosed domestic awardees prevents a detailed analysis of contractor experience and potential conflicts. 5. Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a broad category, and the specific services rendered are crucial for performance evaluation. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major federal agency with significant procurement activity.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The $66.4 million award for facilities support services, with a duration of 272 days, appears high on a per-day basis. Without competitive bidding, it is difficult to benchmark the pricing against market rates or similar contracts. The lack of disclosed awardees further complicates the assessment of value for money, as there is no basis for comparison regarding contractor efficiency or pricing strategies. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope, but the overall cost raises concerns about whether taxpayers received the best possible price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a sole-source or non-competitive procedure, as indicated by 'NOT COMPETED'. This means that only one vendor was solicited or considered for the award. The lack of competition limits the opportunity for price discovery and may result in higher costs for the government compared to a fully competed contract. It is essential to understand the justification for this sole-source award to determine if it was indeed necessary and in the government's best interest.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may have paid a premium for these facilities support services. Without multiple bids, there was no pressure on the contractor to offer the most competitive price, potentially leading to inefficient use of federal funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are likely the facilities management personnel and potentially the end-users of the facilities supported by these services. The services delivered fall under Facilities Support Services, which can encompass a wide range of activities including maintenance, repair, operations, and custodial services. The geographic impact is limited to the specific facilities managed by the Department of the Army where these services were rendered. Workforce implications would include the employment of individuals performing the facilities support tasks, potentially including both government and contractor personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced value for taxpayer money.
Undisclosed awardees prevent assessment of contractor's past performance and suitability for the services.
Short contract duration (272 days) coupled with a large award value ($66.4M) suggests a potentially inefficient cost structure.
The broad category of 'Facilities Support Services' without specific details makes it hard to evaluate the necessity and scope of services.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government, assuming the scope was well-defined.
Awarded by the Department of the Army, indicating a need within a significant federal agency.
The contract falls under a standard industrial classification (NAICS 561210) for facilities support, a common government requirement.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) represent a significant segment of the government contracting market, encompassing a wide array of maintenance, repair, and operational services for federal facilities. Spending in this sector is consistently high across various agencies. This contract, valued at $66.4 million, fits within the typical range for large-scale facilities management contracts, though the lack of competition makes direct comparison difficult. Benchmarking against similar sole-source awards in this category would be necessary for a more precise assessment.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a factor in this award, as 'sb' is false and 'ss' is false. There is no indication of small business set-aside provisions or subcontracting requirements. This suggests that the contract was likely awarded to a large business entity, and its impact on the small business ecosystem is minimal unless the prime contractor has its own subcontracting plan that is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) responsible for monitoring performance and ensuring compliance with the contract terms. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature and undisclosed awardee, making it difficult for external parties to assess oversight effectiveness. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Facilities Maintenance and Repair Services
Base Operations Support
Logistics and Support Services
Government Property Management

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Undisclosed Awardee
High Per-Day Cost
Potential for Overpricing

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $66.4 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $66.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-06-23. End: 2017-03-22.

What specific facilities support services were included in this $66.4 million contract?

The provided data identifies the contract under NAICS code 561210, which covers Facilities Support Services. This broad category can include a wide range of activities such as building maintenance, repair, operations, custodial services, groundskeeping, and security. However, without the specific contract statement of work (SOW) or detailed description, the precise services rendered under this $66.4 million award remain undisclosed. Understanding the exact scope is critical for evaluating the necessity of the expenditure, assessing performance, and determining if the firm-fixed-price was appropriate for the defined tasks. The lack of competition further emphasizes the need for clarity on the services provided to justify the significant investment.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The data explicitly states 'CT: NOT COMPETED', indicating a sole-source or non-competitive award. Federal procurement regulations (like the FAR) allow for sole-source awards under specific circumstances, such as when only one responsible source can satisfy the agency's needs, in cases of urgent and compelling need, or when a public interest determination is made. However, the specific justification for this $66.4 million Department of the Army contract is not provided in the given data. Without this justification, it is impossible to assess whether the non-competitive award was appropriate and in the government's best interest, or if it potentially bypassed opportunities for better pricing through competition.

How does the per-day cost of this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar facilities support services?

The contract has a total value of $66,407,956.92 and a duration of 272 days. This equates to a daily cost of approximately $244,147. This figure is substantial and likely exceeds typical daily operational costs for many facilities support contracts, especially considering it was not competed. Without knowing the specific services rendered (e.g., janitorial, HVAC maintenance, security, infrastructure repair) and the scale/complexity of the facilities involved, a precise benchmark is difficult. However, for a non-competitive award of this magnitude over a relatively short period, the per-day cost raises significant questions about value for money and whether a competitive process might have yielded a substantially lower daily rate.

What is the track record of the undisclosed contractor for similar facilities support services?

The provided data does not include the name of the contractor awarded this $66.4 million facilities support contract, only stating 'DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)'. Consequently, it is impossible to assess the contractor's track record, past performance, or experience in delivering similar services. This lack of transparency is a significant drawback, particularly for a non-competitively awarded contract. A thorough review would typically involve examining past performance evaluations, any contract disputes or terminations, and the contractor's capacity and expertise relevant to the scope of work. Without this information, the government's decision to award such a substantial contract to an undisclosed entity lacks a critical layer of due diligence.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award of this size and duration?

Sole-source awards of this magnitude ($66.4 million) and duration (272 days) carry several inherent risks. Firstly, the lack of competition significantly reduces the likelihood of achieving the best possible price, potentially leading to overspending. Secondly, without multiple bidders, there's less incentive for the awarded contractor to innovate or optimize service delivery. Thirdly, the absence of a competitive vetting process increases the risk of awarding the contract to a less capable or less suitable vendor. Finally, the lack of transparency surrounding the awardee and the justification process can erode public trust and raise concerns about fairness and potential impropriety. Effective oversight becomes paramount 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: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $66,407,957

Exercised Options: $66,407,957

Current Obligation: $66,407,957

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline