DoD's $15.1M Facilities Support Contract Awarded to Fluor Intercontinental Raises Value Concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,117,853 ($15.1M)

Contractor: Fluor Intercontinental, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-30

End Date: 2011-03-31

Contract Duration: 547 days

Daily Burn Rate: $27.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.1 million to FLUOR INTERCONTINENTAL, INC for work described as: LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract's value-for-money is questionable given the lack of competition and cost-plus contract type. 2. Limited competition dynamics suggest potential for inflated pricing and reduced contractor incentive for efficiency. 3. Risk indicators include the cost-plus contract type, which shifts cost overruns to the government. 4. Performance context is limited due to the 'NOT COMPETED' status, hindering benchmarking. 5. This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a common area for government outsourcing. 6. The duration of 547 days for a $15.1M contract warrants scrutiny regarding scope and efficiency.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The $15.1 million award for facilities support services over 547 days appears high without a competitive bidding process to establish a fair market price. The 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' (CPFF) contract type, while offering flexibility, can lead to higher overall costs for the government compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed closely. Benchmarking against similar facilities support contracts is difficult without knowing the specific services rendered and their geographic scope, but the lack of competition suggests potential for suboptimal pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a 'NOT COMPETED' basis, indicating a sole-source procurement. This means that Fluor Intercontinental, Inc. was the only contractor considered for this award. Without a competitive solicitation, it is impossible to determine the number of potential bidders or the level of market interest. This lack of competition significantly limits price discovery and may result in the government paying more than it would in a fully competed scenario.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these services due to the absence of competitive pressure to drive down costs. The government missed an opportunity to leverage market forces for better value.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from the provision of essential life support and facilities management services. Services delivered likely include maintenance, repair, and operational support for government facilities. The geographic impact is tied to the specific military installation(s) where Fluor Intercontinental operates. Workforce implications include potential employment opportunities for local staff managed by Fluor Intercontinental.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Lack of competition raises concerns about fair pricing and potential for cost overruns.
  • Cost-plus contract type can disincentivize contractor efficiency and cost control.
  • Limited transparency due to sole-source award makes performance and value assessment challenging.
  • Absence of a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable) could limit opportunities for small businesses.

Positive Signals

  • Fluor Intercontinental is a large, established contractor with experience in government services.
  • The contract addresses critical life support and facilities management needs for the Department of Defense.
  • The fixed fee component of the CPFF contract provides some level of cost predictability for the contractor's profit.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a broad category encompassing a wide range of services essential for the operation and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure. This sector is a significant area of government spending, often outsourced to private contractors. The market includes large, diversified companies like Fluor Intercontinental, as well as specialized service providers. Government spending in this sector is driven by the need to maintain operational readiness and reduce the burden on military and civilian personnel for non-core functions. Benchmarks for such contracts vary widely based on scope, location, and service complexity.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). There is no explicit mention of a subcontracting plan. This suggests that Fluor Intercontinental, as the prime contractor, is not mandated to subcontract a portion of the work to small businesses under this specific award. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract appears minimal, although Fluor may engage small businesses as part of its broader supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight. The 'NOT COMPETED' status may trigger additional scrutiny from oversight bodies like the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or the Department of Defense Inspector General (DoDIG) if specific concerns regarding the procurement process or performance arise. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, making public assessment of accountability more challenging.

Related Government Programs

  • Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
  • Life Support Services Contracts
  • Base Operations Support (BOS) Contracts
  • Government Facilities Management Services

Risk Flags

  • Lack of Competition
  • Cost-Plus Contract Type
  • Limited Transparency

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, facilities-support-services, life-support-services, definitive-contract, cost-plus-fixed-fee, not-competed, sole-source, fluor-intercontinental-inc

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.1 million to FLUOR INTERCONTINENTAL, INC. LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FLUOR INTERCONTINENTAL, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-30. End: 2011-03-31.

What specific life support and facilities services were included in this $15.1 million contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 561210 (Facilities Support Services) and is described as 'LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES'. However, the specific breakdown of services is not detailed. Typically, such contracts can encompass a wide range of activities including, but not limited to, facility maintenance and repair, custodial services, groundskeeping, pest control, waste management, transportation services, and potentially logistical support for personnel. Without further documentation, the exact scope remains undefined, making a precise value assessment difficult.

Why was this contract not competed, and what was the justification for a sole-source award to Fluor Intercontinental, Inc.?

The data explicitly states 'CT: NOT COMPETED', indicating a sole-source award. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 6 outlines the policies for contracting without full and open competition. Justifications for such awards typically fall into categories like urgency, specialized capabilities only available from a single source, or when it's in the government's best interest due to specific circumstances (e.g., follow-on work to a previously competed contract where only one contractor can perform). The specific justification for this Fluor Intercontinental contract is not provided in the summary data, but it would have been documented and approved by the contracting agency.

How does the 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' (CPFF) contract type impact the overall cost and risk for the government compared to other contract types?

A Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This type shifts significant cost risk to the government, as the final cost is not fixed. If costs exceed estimates, the government pays more. While it allows for flexibility and is often used for research, development, or services where cost estimation is difficult, it provides less incentive for the contractor to control costs compared to fixed-price contracts. The fixed fee, however, provides some predictability regarding the contractor's profit margin.

What is Fluor Intercontinental, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense and in providing facilities support services?

Fluor Intercontinental, Inc. is a large, established global engineering and construction firm with extensive experience in government contracting, including significant work with the Department of Defense. They have a history of managing large-scale projects and providing a wide array of services, including base operations support, logistics, and facilities management, often in complex or remote environments. While this specific contract's details are limited, Fluor's general track record suggests they possess the capacity and experience to handle such requirements. However, a detailed review of past performance specific to similar DoD contracts would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment.

What were the historical spending patterns for similar facilities support services by the Department of the Army prior to this award?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for similar services. To assess this, one would need to analyze historical contract awards for Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) or related categories like Base Operations Support (BOS) awarded by the Department of the Army over several fiscal years. This analysis would involve identifying comparable contracts, their values, durations, and the contractors involved. Comparing the $15.1 million award to historical averages and trends would help determine if this contract represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of spending for these types of services.

Are there any performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) associated with this contract that can be used to evaluate Fluor Intercontinental's performance?

The summary data does not specify any performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) associated with this contract. In a CPFF contract, performance is typically evaluated against the scope of work defined in the contract and any specific service level agreements (SLAs) or quality standards outlined. The effectiveness of oversight and the clarity of these metrics are crucial for assessing contractor performance and ensuring value for money. Without access to the full contract details, it's impossible to determine the specific KPIs used, if any.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesFacilities Support ServicesFacilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPINGHOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W912ER09R0091

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Fluor Corporation (UEI: 006907190)

Address: 100 FLUOR DANIEL DR, GREENVILLE, SC, 29607

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,117,853

Exercised Options: $15,117,853

Current Obligation: $15,117,853

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2009-09-30

Current End Date: 2011-03-31

Potential End Date: 2011-04-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2017-06-12

More Contracts from Fluor Intercontinental, Inc

View all Fluor Intercontinental, Inc federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending