Life support services contract for $27.1M awarded to undisclosed domestic entities by the Army

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,131,581 ($27.1M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-05-15

End Date: 2016-08-14

Contract Duration: 1,552 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: CFSOCC-A LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES CI

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.1 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: CFSOCC-A LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES CI Key points: 1. Contract awarded for facilities support services, indicating a need for essential operational functions. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies and market fairness. 3. A firm fixed-price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government, but may limit flexibility. 4. The duration of 1552 days (over 4 years) indicates a long-term commitment to these services. 5. The lack of disclosed awardees makes it difficult to assess contractor performance or market concentration. 6. Services provided are essential for base operations, highlighting the critical nature of this spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to the undisclosed awardees and the lack of competitive bidding. Without comparison to similar services procured through a competitive process, it's difficult to ascertain if the $27.1 million represents a fair market price. The firm fixed-price structure, while offering cost certainty, could lead to overpayment if the contractor's costs are significantly lower than anticipated. The absence of detailed performance metrics or cost breakdowns further hinders a robust value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a sole-source or limited competition procurement. The specific reasons for this designation are not provided, but it means the Department of the Army did not solicit offers from multiple potential contractors. This lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to achieve the best possible pricing and service terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the most cost-effective solution due to the absence of competitive pressure. The government may have paid a premium for these life support services compared to what could have been achieved in an open bidding environment.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families stationed at the facility benefit from essential life support services. The contract ensures the continuity of base operations by providing critical facilities support. Geographic impact is localized to the specific Department of the Army installation where services are rendered. Workforce implications include potential employment opportunities for individuals in facilities management and support roles, though specific numbers are not available.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced innovation.
Undisclosed awardees obscure contractor track record and potential conflicts of interest.
Firm fixed-price contract may not be optimal for services with variable demand or unforeseen circumstances.
Limited transparency in the procurement process hinders accountability.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Services are essential for maintaining operational readiness of military installations.
Domestic awardees suggest support for the U.S. economy, though specific entities are unknown.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a broad category encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and grounds. This sector is critical for government operations, particularly for military installations requiring robust support systems. Spending in this area is often substantial, reflecting the extensive infrastructure managed by federal agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without knowing the specific scope of services and location, but large-scale facilities support contracts can run into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a stated factor in this contract (ss: false, sb: false). As a sole-source award, there were likely no specific small business set-aside provisions or subcontracting goals mandated. This means the primary contractor, whoever it may be, was not required to engage small businesses for a portion of the work, potentially limiting opportunities within the small business ecosystem for this specific procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) at the Department of the Army, responsible for monitoring performance and ensuring compliance with contract terms. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, which penalizes the contractor for cost overruns. However, the lack of transparency regarding the awardee and specific performance metrics makes a thorough assessment of oversight effectiveness challenging. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support Services
Logistics and Facilities Management Contracts
Government Infrastructure Maintenance
Contingency Support Services

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Undisclosed Awardee
Limited Transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.1 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). CFSOCC-A LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES CI

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 $27.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-05-15. End: 2016-08-14.

What specific life support and facilities services were included under this contract?

The provided data categorizes this contract under NAICS code 561210, 'Facilities Support Services.' While 'life support services' is mentioned in the description, the exact breakdown of services is not detailed. Typically, facilities support services can encompass a wide range of activities including maintenance, repair, custodial services, groundskeeping, pest control, security, and potentially even services related to housing, food, and utilities for personnel on a military installation. The term 'life support' suggests a focus on ensuring the basic habitability and operational readiness of the living and working spaces for service members and their families.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of being competed?

The provided data explicitly states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED' (ct: NOT COMPETED). Federal procurement regulations allow for non-competitive awards under specific circumstances, such as when only one responsible source is available, or in cases of urgent and compelling need. Without further documentation or justification from the Department of the Army, the precise reason for this sole-source award remains unknown. Common justifications include specialized capabilities, proprietary technology, or a critical, time-sensitive requirement where competition is impractical. This lack of competition, however, limits the government's ability to ensure it received the best value.

What is the typical cost range for similar life support and facilities services contracts within the Department of Defense?

The cost range for similar contracts can vary significantly based on the scope of services, geographic location, duration, and the specific needs of the installation. However, contracts for comprehensive facilities support and life support services on military bases often represent substantial investments. For large installations requiring extensive maintenance, housing, dining, and utility support, annual costs can easily range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. The $27.1 million awarded over approximately four years for this contract ($6.775 million annually on average) falls within a plausible range for significant base support, but without knowing the specific services and location, a precise comparison is difficult.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract for essential services like life support?

Sole-source contracts carry several inherent risks. Firstly, the lack of competition can lead to higher prices than might be achieved through a competitive bidding process, as the government does not benefit from market pressures driving efficiency and cost reduction. Secondly, there's a risk of reduced service quality or innovation, as the contractor may face less pressure to excel when there are no competitors vying for future business. Thirdly, transparency is diminished, making it harder to assess the fairness of the price and the contractor's performance. Finally, it can limit opportunities for other capable businesses, including small businesses, to enter the market and provide these essential services.

How does the firm fixed-price contract type impact the government and the contractor in this scenario?

A firm fixed-price (FFP) contract is generally preferred by the government when the scope of work is well-defined and risks can be reasonably estimated. For the government, the primary benefit of an FFP contract is cost certainty; the price is set and generally not subject to upward adjustment, regardless of the contractor's actual costs. This protects the government from cost overruns. For the contractor, the risk is higher. They bear the responsibility for managing costs effectively to ensure profitability. If their costs exceed the fixed price, their profit margin shrinks, or they may incur a loss. Conversely, if they manage costs efficiently, they can achieve a higher profit.

What does the duration of the contract (1552 days) imply about the nature of the services?

A contract duration of 1552 days, which is approximately 4 years and 3 months, suggests that the life support and facilities services required are ongoing and essential for the long-term operational needs of the military installation. Such extended durations are typical for services that are fundamental to base operations and require a stable provider to ensure continuity and minimize disruption. It implies that the Department of the Army anticipated a consistent need for these services over a significant period, allowing for planning and resource allocation by both the government and the awarded contractor.

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: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W5J9JE12T0001

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: $35,718,162

Exercised Options: $27,131,581

Current Obligation: $27,131,581

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline