DoD's $20.5M architectural services contract awarded to miscellaneous foreign awardees over 11 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,474,836 ($20.5M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-06-29

End Date: 2020-09-10

Contract Duration: 4,091 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 7.1.2 - 7.1.4 SERVICES & SEC SERVICES

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.5 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: 7.1.2 - 7.1.4 SERVICES & SEC SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a broad search for qualified bidders. 2. The contract utilized a firm-fixed-price structure, which typically shifts cost risk to the contractor. 3. A long duration of over 11 years (4091 days) may indicate a need for sustained architectural support. 4. The award to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' raises questions about the specific entities involved and their qualifications. 5. The contract's value of over $20 million warrants scrutiny regarding cost-effectiveness and market alignment. 6. The absence of small business set-asides suggests the scope or nature of services did not lend itself to such provisions.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking architectural services contracts is challenging without specific details on the scope and complexity of the services rendered. However, a contract of this magnitude over an extended period suggests a significant need. The firm-fixed-price nature is generally favorable for cost control, but the ultimate value depends on the quality and efficiency of the delivered architectural solutions. The award to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' introduces an element of uncertainty regarding the specific expertise and pricing structures compared to domestic firms.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that the Department of the Army sought proposals from all responsible sources. The presence of two awardees suggests that while competition was sought, the final selection was narrowed down. The level of competition, while broad in its initial solicitation, resulted in a limited number of actual awardees, which could impact price negotiation.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best value by allowing a wide range of potential contractors to bid, fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely entities within the Department of Defense requiring architectural design and planning services for various projects. Services delivered include architectural design, planning, and potentially related consulting for military facilities or infrastructure. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around Department of Defense installations where architectural services are needed, potentially worldwide given the foreign awardees. Workforce implications could involve the employment of architects, drafters, and related professionals by the awarded foreign entities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of transparency regarding the specific foreign entities awarded the contract and their qualifications.
Potential for increased administrative burden and oversight complexity when contracting with foreign entities.
Uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness and value delivered due to the broad nature of 'miscellaneous foreign awardees'.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting an effort to obtain competitive pricing and qualified bidders.
Firm-fixed-price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government.
Long contract duration indicates a sustained need and potential for stable support.

Sector Analysis

The architectural services sector is a critical component of the construction and defense industries, providing design and planning expertise for infrastructure projects. The Department of Defense is a significant consumer of these services for its global facilities. Spending in this sector can range widely based on project scale, from small renovations to large-scale base development. This contract, valued at over $20 million, falls into a substantial category for architectural support within the defense domain.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the scope of architectural services required was likely beyond the typical capacity or specialization of small businesses, or that the competition was structured to attract larger, potentially international firms. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans, but the absence of small business involvement implies limited direct opportunities for them within this specific contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. The firm-fixed-price nature provides some cost control, but performance monitoring would be crucial to ensure the quality and timeliness of architectural services. Transparency is limited by the 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' designation, making detailed public scrutiny of the specific contractors challenging. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Architectural Services
Military Construction Projects
Foreign Military Sales Support
Engineering and Technical Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of specific contractor identification
Potential for cost overruns if scope is not well-managed
Uncertainty regarding foreign entity qualifications and compliance

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.5 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. 7.1.2 - 7.1.4 SERVICES & SEC SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-06-29. End: 2020-09-10.

What specific types of architectural projects were undertaken under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact types of architectural projects. However, given the awarding agency is the Department of the Army, these services likely encompassed design, planning, and potentially oversight for a range of military facilities. This could include new construction, renovations, infrastructure upgrades, or specialized facility designs for operational needs. The broad nature of 'architectural services' suggests a versatile contract capable of addressing diverse requirements across different Army installations or global operations.

Can the value of this contract be benchmarked against similar architectural services procured by the DoD?

Benchmarking this $20.5 million contract is difficult without more granular data on the specific services rendered, the complexity of the projects, and the geographic locations. Architectural service costs vary significantly based on project scale, design requirements, and prevailing market rates in different regions. While the firm-fixed-price structure aims for cost certainty, the overall value is determined by the quality and efficiency of the delivered architectural solutions. Comparing it to other large-scale DoD architectural contracts would require access to detailed project scopes and pricing structures.

What are the implications of awarding this contract to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees'?

Awarding contracts to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' can introduce several implications. It suggests that the Army sought expertise or capacity that may not have been readily available or competitively priced among domestic firms. This could lead to access to specialized international design standards or cost efficiencies. However, it also raises potential concerns regarding oversight, communication, adherence to U.S. standards, and the geopolitical implications of awarding significant defense contracts to foreign entities. The lack of specific identification for these awardees hinders a thorough assessment of their track record and capabilities.

How does the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type affect risk and value for this architectural services contract?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type generally shifts the majority of the cost risk from the government to the contractor. For architectural services, this means the awarded contractor is obligated to complete the defined scope of work for the agreed-upon price, regardless of their actual costs. This provides the government with significant cost certainty. The value is then primarily determined by the quality of the architectural designs and services delivered within that fixed price. If the contractor underestimates costs or encounters unforeseen challenges, they absorb the loss, which can incentivize efficiency. Conversely, if the scope is not clearly defined, the contractor may deliver minimal effort to maximize profit, necessitating robust performance monitoring by the government.

What is the historical spending pattern for architectural services by the Department of the Army?

The provided data only details a single contract from 2009-2020. To understand historical spending patterns for architectural services by the Department of the Army, a broader analysis of federal procurement databases (like USASpending.gov) would be necessary. This would involve aggregating spending across multiple contracts, fiscal years, and specific NAICS codes related to architectural services (e.g., 541310). Such an analysis would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, primary awardees, and overall budget allocation for architectural support over time.

What is the significance of the contract duration (4091 days)?

A contract duration of 4091 days, approximately 11 years and 3 months, is substantial for an architectural services contract. This lengthy period suggests that the services required were not for a single, discrete project but rather for ongoing, long-term support. This could involve master planning for installations, phased development projects, or providing a continuous pool of architectural expertise to meet evolving needs. Such long-term contracts can offer stability and continuity for both the agency and the contractor, but they also require careful management to ensure continued relevance and value over their extended life.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,594,794

Exercised Options: $20,594,794

Current Obligation: $20,474,836

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline