DoD awards $6.4M follow-on services contract for general automotive repair to DUCOM, INCORPORATED

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,441,974 ($6.4M)

Contractor: Ducom, Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-11-27

End Date: 2023-11-29

Contract Duration: 1,097 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: AWARD OF CLS FOLLOW ON SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: SILVER SPRING, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20910

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $6.4 million to DUCOM, INCORPORATED for work described as: AWARD OF CLS FOLLOW ON SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Delivery order type indicates a specific task within a larger contract vehicle. 3. The contract duration of 1097 days (approx. 3 years) provides a stable period for service delivery. 4. The Time and Materials pricing structure may pose a risk for cost overruns if not closely managed. 5. The award to DUCOM, INCORPORATED, a single entity, requires scrutiny of their performance history. 6. The NAICS code 811111 points to a specific segment of the automotive repair market.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The award amount of $6.44 million for general automotive repair services over approximately three years appears reasonable given the scope. However, without specific details on the services rendered (e.g., number of vehicles, types of repairs), a direct comparison to similar contracts is challenging. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing model, while common, can lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently, potentially impacting overall value for money.

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 presence of 7 bidders (as indicated by 'no': 7) suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and potentially leads to more competitive pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely drove down prices and ensured the government received a fair market value for the automotive repair services.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from the provision of essential automotive repair services for its fleet. Military personnel and operations are supported through the maintenance of reliable vehicles. The contract supports the automotive repair industry, potentially creating or sustaining jobs within the sector. Services are likely delivered within the geographic area of the contracting agency, primarily Maryland (MD).

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials pricing structure carries inherent risk of cost escalation if not closely monitored.
Limited information on specific repair services provided makes it difficult to benchmark value effectively.
Follow-on nature of the award warrants review of the incumbent's past performance.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
Multiple bidders (7) participated, suggesting market interest and potential for competitive pricing.
Contract duration of nearly three years provides service stability.

Sector Analysis

The automotive repair and maintenance sector is a critical component of the broader transportation and logistics industry. This contract falls under the General Automotive Repair services category (NAICS 811111). Federal spending in this area supports the maintenance of government vehicle fleets, ensuring operational readiness. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other DoD or federal agency contracts for similar fleet maintenance services, considering factors like fleet size, vehicle types, and geographic location.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for specialized repair services or parts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms and conditions of the delivery order, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of contract awards, but detailed operational oversight specifics are typically internal.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Vehicle Maintenance Contracts
General Automotive Repair Services
Federal Fleet Management Services
Army Logistics Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
Need for robust performance monitoring to ensure value for money.
Limited transparency on specific services rendered and their necessity.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $6.4 million to DUCOM, INCORPORATED. AWARD OF CLS FOLLOW ON SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DUCOM, INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-11-27. End: 2023-11-29.

What is the track record of DUCOM, INCORPORATED with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

A thorough review of DUCOM, INCORPORATED's federal contract history would be necessary to assess their track record. This would involve examining past performance evaluations, any documented issues or disputes, and their experience with similar automotive repair services. For this specific contract, understanding their performance on any previous related awards would be crucial. Data from systems like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) would provide insights into their reliability, quality of service, and adherence to contract terms. Without access to this detailed performance history, it's difficult to definitively assess their capability to fulfill this follow-on award effectively.

How does the awarded amount compare to the estimated value or budget for this type of service?

The awarded amount of $6.44 million for approximately three years of general automotive repair services needs to be contextualized against the government's initial estimate or budget for this requirement. Since this is a follow-on award, it's possible that previous contract values provide a benchmark. However, the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure introduces variability. If the government's estimate was based on a fixed-price or a more controlled T&M projection, the final cost could deviate. A comparison would ideally involve analyzing the average cost per vehicle serviced or per repair hour, benchmarked against industry standards and similar government contracts, to determine if the $6.44 million represents good value or if it's potentially inflated due to the T&M model.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this automotive repair service?

The primary risk with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for automotive repair is the potential for cost escalation. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M agreements reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours at specified hourly rates and for the actual cost of materials used. This structure can incentivize longer repair times or the use of more expensive parts if not rigorously managed. For the government, this means the total cost is not fixed upfront and can exceed initial projections. Effective risk mitigation requires robust oversight, including detailed tracking of labor hours, verification of material costs, and clear definitions of what constitutes a billable hour or necessary part. Without strong government surveillance, the contractor has less incentive to control costs, potentially leading to a less favorable value for taxpayers.

What is the significance of this contract being a 'follow-on' award?

The term 'follow-on' suggests that this contract is a continuation or replacement of a previous contract for similar services. This has several implications. Firstly, it implies that the incumbent contractor, DUCOM, INCORPORATED, likely has existing knowledge and infrastructure related to the Department of the Army's automotive repair needs. Secondly, it raises questions about the competition process; while awarded under 'full and open competition,' the follow-on nature might still favor the incumbent if they possess unique qualifications or if the transition costs for a new contractor are perceived as high. Taxpayers benefit if the follow-on award reflects continued good performance and competitive pricing. Conversely, if the competition was less robust than it appeared, or if the incumbent's pricing is not competitive, it could represent a missed opportunity for cost savings.

How does the geographic location (Maryland) influence the cost and delivery of these automotive repair services?

The contract specifies 'MARYLAND' (MD) as the state, likely indicating the primary location where the services will be performed or where the contracting office is situated. Geographic location can influence costs due to variations in labor rates, cost of living, and proximity to parts suppliers. In a high-cost-of-living area like Maryland, labor rates might be higher compared to other regions, potentially increasing the overall contract value. Furthermore, the accessibility of repair facilities and the logistics of transporting vehicles for service can impact delivery times and efficiency. While the contract value of $6.44 million is provided, understanding the specific operational footprint within Maryland would allow for a more precise assessment of cost-effectiveness relative to regional economic factors.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Automotive Repair and Maintenance › General Automotive Repair

Product/Service Code: TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SVCS. › TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 8630 FENTON ST, SILVER SPRING, MD, 20910

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,169,372

Exercised Options: $6,441,974

Current Obligation: $6,441,974

Actual Outlays: $303,629

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W56HZV15DER05

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline