DoD's $333M Fort Benning Facilities Contract Awarded to TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C. for 5 Years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $333,142,007 ($333.1M)

Contractor: Tiya Services, L.L.C.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-09-01

End Date: 2025-08-31

Contract Duration: 2,191 days

Daily Burn Rate: $152.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: BASOPS FORT BENNING GA

Place of Performance

Location: FORT BENNING, CHATTAHOOCHEE County, GEORGIA, 31905

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $333.1 million to TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C. for work described as: BASOPS FORT BENNING GA Key points: 1. The contract value of $333.14 million over five years suggests a significant investment in facilities support services. 2. The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' indicates a competitive process, though the specific exclusion warrants further review. 3. The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns, requiring robust oversight. 4. TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C. is the sole awardee, highlighting the importance of their specific capabilities or market position. 5. The contract duration of 2191 days (approx. 5 years) provides long-term stability for service delivery but also locks in pricing. 6. The primary service NAICS code 561210 (Facilities Support Services) is broad, encompassing a wide range of potential activities. 7. The contract's geographic focus on Fort Benning, Georgia, indicates a localized but critical support function for military operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $333 million contract is challenging without detailed service breakdowns and performance metrics. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, while common for complex services, can lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed tightly. The fixed fee component provides some cost certainty for the contractor, but the government bears the risk of all allowable costs. Comparing this to similar large-scale facilities support contracts at other major military installations would be necessary for a more precise value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This designation implies that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were excluded for specific reasons, potentially related to national security, proprietary information, or unique capabilities. The number of bidders (6) suggests a moderate level of interest, but the exclusion of some potential bidders may have limited the overall competitive landscape and potentially impacted price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of certain sources, even in an otherwise open competition, could mean taxpayers did not benefit from the lowest possible price that might have been achieved with broader participation. However, the presence of 6 bidders indicates some level of price competition was likely achieved.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families stationed at Fort Benning benefit from well-maintained facilities, ensuring operational readiness and quality of life. The contract delivers essential facilities support services, including maintenance, repair, and potentially operations of various buildings and infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated at Fort Benning, Georgia, a major U.S. Army installation. The contract supports a workforce involved in facilities management, maintenance, and related trades, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type increases government risk for cost overruns.
The 'exclusion of sources' in an otherwise open competition raises questions about the breadth of competition and potential price impacts.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the contractor's efficiency and effectiveness.
The long contract duration could lead to vendor lock-in and reduced flexibility for the government to adapt to changing needs.

Positive Signals

Awarding to a single contractor (TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C.) suggests they met all stringent requirements for this complex service.
The contract was competed, indicating an effort to secure services through a structured process rather than sole-sourcing.
The duration of the contract provides stability and predictability for essential facilities support at a major installation.
The contract is for facilities support, a critical function for military base operations and readiness.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a substantial sector within government contracting, encompassing a wide array of services from building maintenance and repair to groundskeeping and utility management. This contract represents a significant portion of spending within this category for the Department of the Army at a major installation. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found by analyzing other large-scale base operations support contracts at similar-sized military installations across different branches of the DoD.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside criterion for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications mandated by small business set-asides. However, the prime contractor, TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C., may still engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill portions of the contract, which would contribute to the broader small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and a contract specialist team within the Department of the Army. Robust oversight would involve regular reviews of costs incurred, performance against requirements, and adherence to the fixed fee structure. Transparency is facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms, and while specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction isn't detailed here, the DoD IG generally has oversight over all DoD contracts to investigate fraud, waste, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support (BOS)
Facilities Maintenance and Repair Contracts
Department of Defense Construction and Facilities Management
Army Installation Support Services

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion
Broad NAICS code requires detailed SOW review for scope clarity
Long contract duration may reduce flexibility

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $333.1 million to TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C.. BASOPS FORT BENNING GA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $333.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-09-01. End: 2025-08-31.

What is the track record of TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C. in performing similar large-scale facilities support contracts for the Department of Defense?

Assessing TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C.'s track record requires a deeper dive into their contract history beyond this single award. Information on past performance, including successful completion of similar scope and value contracts, client satisfaction ratings, and any history of disputes or performance issues, would be crucial. Government contract databases and past performance evaluations, if publicly accessible, can provide insights. A strong track record with the DoD would indicate a lower risk for this significant contract, while a limited or problematic history would raise concerns about TIYA SERVICES' ability to meet the demands of this $333 million agreement effectively and efficiently.

How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) compare to other facilities support contracts of similar scope and duration?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or involves significant uncertainties, allowing the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPFF generally offers less price certainty for the government and can incentivize higher spending if oversight is lax. For facilities support, fixed-price contracts might be preferred for routine maintenance, while CPFF could be justified for complex, evolving support needs. Benchmarking against similar-sized installations or contracts with different pricing structures would reveal if this CPFF award represents a competitive or potentially higher-cost approach for the government.

What specific services are included under the 'Facilities Support Services' (NAICS 561210) for this contract, and how are they measured?

The NAICS code 561210 for Facilities Support Services is broad and can encompass a wide range of activities, including building operation and maintenance, groundskeeping, custodial services, pest control, and potentially even security or mailroom operations. For this specific contract, the Statement of Work (SOW) would detail the precise services required by BASOPS FORT BENNING GA. Performance metrics and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) would be outlined to measure the contractor's success in delivering these services. Without the SOW and performance standards, it's difficult to fully assess the scope and the government's ability to hold TIYA SERVICES, L.L.C. accountable for service quality and efficiency.

What are the potential risks associated with the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' designation, and how were these mitigated?

The designation 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific potential bidders were intentionally excluded. The risks here include potentially limiting the pool of highly qualified bidders, which could lead to less competitive pricing, or excluding innovative solutions. Mitigation strategies would involve clearly documenting the rationale for exclusion (e.g., national security, unique capability requirements) and ensuring that the remaining pool of bidders was sufficient to foster meaningful competition. The government must demonstrate that the exclusion was justified and did not unduly restrict competition.

How has historical spending on facilities support services at Fort Benning compared to this contract's value and duration?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for facilities support at Fort Benning is crucial for context. If previous contracts for similar services were significantly lower in value or shorter in duration, this $333 million award over five years might represent an increase in scope, service level, or market rates. Conversely, if historical spending was comparable, it suggests a consistent need and budget allocation for these services. Understanding trends in spending can help identify potential cost efficiencies or areas where costs have escalated, informing future budgeting and contract strategies.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W911SF16R0012

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Tiya Services L.L.C.

Address: 345-B HIGHLANDIA DRIVE, BATON ROUGE, LA, 70810

Business Categories: American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Government, Native American Tribal Government, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $429,992,933

Exercised Options: $429,992,933

Current Obligation: $333,142,007

Actual Outlays: $53,473,279

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 16

Total Subaward Amount: $903,278

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline