Altos Federal Group Inc. awarded $12.38M contract by Department of Defense for services in Texas

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,384,588 ($12.4M)

Contractor: Altos Federal Group Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-10-21

End Date: 2008-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,440 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 23

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: FORT HOOD, BELL County, TEXAS, 76544

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.4 million to ALTOS FEDERAL GROUP INC for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value of $12.38M over 4 years suggests a moderate annual spend. 2. Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment contract type introduces potential for cost fluctuations. 3. The contract was awarded under Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources, indicating a competitive process. 4. Performance period of 1440 days (4 years) allows for sustained service delivery. 5. The contract's duration and value place it within a typical range for many federal service contracts. 6. Awarded to a single entity, Altos Federal Group Inc., highlighting contractor specialization.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $12.38M over approximately 4 years equates to an average annual spend of roughly $3.1M. Without specific service details or benchmarks, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money. However, the fixed-price nature with economic price adjustments suggests an attempt to control costs while allowing for market fluctuations. Further analysis would require comparing this to similar service contracts within the Department of Defense or for specific tasks performed.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was initially broad, certain sources may have been excluded prior to the final award. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation generally implies a robust competitive process aimed at achieving fair market prices. The exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to understand its impact on the competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: This competitive approach, despite potential exclusions, aims to ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by leveraging market forces to secure the best possible pricing and service.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from the services provided under this contract, likely supporting critical operational or administrative functions. The contract supports services delivered within Texas, potentially impacting the local economy and workforce. The duration of the contract suggests a need for ongoing support, contributing to stable service provision. Specific workforce implications are not detailed but could involve direct hires or subcontracts by the awardee.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to the Economic Price Adjustment clause.
Lack of transparency regarding the 'Exclusion of Sources' could mask reduced competition.
The specific nature of services and performance metrics are not detailed, making outcome assessment difficult.

Positive Signals

Awarded through a competitive process, suggesting an effort to obtain value.
Fixed Price component provides a baseline cost control measure.
Longer contract duration allows for contractor stability and potential efficiency gains.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broad category of federal services procurement, likely supporting defense operations or infrastructure. The Department of Defense is a significant procurer of a wide range of services, from IT and logistics to maintenance and specialized support. Benchmarking this contract's value would require detailed knowledge of the specific services rendered and comparison to similar contracts within the defense sector, which is known for its complex and high-value procurements.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. However, the prime contractor, Altos Federal Group Inc., may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their business strategy.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract structure, with performance tied to payment. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed performance reports are often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Services Contracts
Fixed Price Contracts
Texas Federal Contracts
Long-Term Service Agreements

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation due to EPA clause.
Ambiguity in 'Exclusion of Sources' could limit competition.
Lack of detailed service description hinders performance assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.4 million to ALTOS FEDERAL GROUP INC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALTOS FEDERAL GROUP 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 $12.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-10-21. End: 2008-09-30.

What specific services does Altos Federal Group Inc. provide under this $12.38M contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the services rendered by Altos Federal Group Inc. under this contract. The data indicates the awardee, agency (Department of Defense, specifically Department of the Army), contract value, period of performance, and contract type. To understand the services, one would need to consult the contract's statement of work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS). These documents detail the tasks, deliverables, and performance standards expected from the contractor. Without this information, it is impossible to assess the effectiveness or value of the services provided.

How does the $12.38M contract value compare to similar Department of Defense service contracts?

The $12.38M contract value over approximately four years translates to an average annual spend of roughly $3.1M. This figure is moderate within the vast landscape of Department of Defense (DoD) procurements, which can range from thousands to billions of dollars. To provide a meaningful comparison, one would need to identify contracts with similar service types, geographic locations (Texas), and contract durations. For instance, if this contract is for routine administrative support, $3.1M annually might be standard. However, if it's for highly specialized technical services, it could be on the lower end, potentially indicating a smaller scope or intense competition driving down costs. A comprehensive benchmark requires detailed analysis of comparable contract data.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment' contract type?

The primary risk associated with a 'Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment' (FPEPA) contract type is the potential for cost escalation beyond the initial fixed price. While the fixed price provides a baseline, the economic price adjustment (EPA) clause allows for modifications to the contract price based on fluctuations in specified economic factors, such as labor rates, material costs, or inflation indices. For the government, the risk is that these adjustments could lead to higher-than-anticipated expenditures, especially in periods of high inflation or volatile market conditions. For the contractor, the risk is that the EPA might not fully compensate for unforeseen cost increases, or that the adjustment mechanism is too complex to manage efficiently. Effective management of an FPEPA contract requires careful monitoring of the economic indicators and clear, objective criteria for adjustments.

What does 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources' imply for price discovery and taxpayer value?

The term 'Full and Open Competition after Exclusion of Sources' suggests a competitive process that began broadly but subsequently excluded certain potential offerors before the final award. While 'Full and Open Competition' is generally a positive indicator for price discovery and taxpayer value, the 'Exclusion of Sources' element introduces a layer of complexity. It implies that specific criteria or conditions led to the removal of some bidders from consideration. The impact on price discovery depends heavily on the reasons for exclusion and the number of remaining bidders. If the exclusions were justified and a sufficient number of qualified bidders remained, robust competition could still be achieved, leading to favorable pricing. However, if the exclusions significantly limited the pool of potential offerors, it could potentially reduce competitive pressure and lead to less optimal pricing for taxpayers. Further investigation into the justification for source exclusion is necessary for a complete assessment.

What is the historical spending pattern for this specific contract or similar services by the Department of the Army?

The provided data represents a single contract award to Altos Federal Group Inc. by the Department of the Army with a start date of 2004-10-21 and an end date of 2008-09-30. This indicates a historical contract that has already concluded. To understand historical spending patterns for similar services, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS) for other contracts awarded by the Department of the Army (or the broader Department of Defense) for comparable services within Texas or nationwide, during or after the period of this contract. Analyzing trends in award values, number of bidders, and contract types over time would reveal patterns. Without access to such broader historical data, it's impossible to establish a spending pattern based solely on this single award.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 23

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT (K)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4829 16TH STREET, N W, WASHINGTON, DC, 98

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Woman Owned Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DADA1003D0008

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline