Interior Department awards $10M+ for facility engineering and technical analysis services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,050,626 ($10.1M)

Contractor: VFA, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2003-04-03

End Date: 2008-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,824 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.5K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FACILITY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ANALYSIS INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE PLANNING.

Place of Performance

Location: BOSTON, SUFFOLK County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02210

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $10.1 million to VFA, INC. for work described as: FACILITY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ANALYSIS INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE PLANNING. Key points: 1. Contract value exceeds $10 million, indicating a significant investment in facility engineering and maintenance. 2. The contract was awarded competitively, suggesting potential for good value and price discovery. 3. A long duration of 1824 days (approx. 5 years) implies a need for sustained support and potential for contractor lock-in. 4. The services encompass inspection, maintenance planning, and technical analysis, crucial for operational efficiency. 5. The award falls under a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract, a common procurement vehicle. 6. The contractor, VFA, Inc., has secured a substantial award, highlighting their role in this sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of over $10 million for facility engineering and technical analysis over a five-year period appears reasonable given the scope of services. Benchmarking against similar large-scale facility management contracts would provide a more precise value assessment. The fixed-price nature of the award suggests that cost overruns are primarily the contractor's responsibility, which is a positive indicator for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order under a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS). This indicates that multiple vendors likely had the opportunity to bid, and the award was made to the most advantageous offer. The competitive nature suggests a healthy price discovery process and potential for cost savings for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award means taxpayers benefit from potentially lower prices and a wider range of technical solutions compared to a sole-source procurement.

Public Impact

Federal facilities managed by the Department of the Interior benefit from expert engineering, inspection, and maintenance planning. Improved facility upkeep and operational efficiency are expected outcomes, ensuring the longevity and functionality of government assets. The services support the core mission of the Department of the Interior by ensuring the infrastructure is sound. Workforce implications may include the need for specialized engineering and technical personnel, both within the government and potentially through the contractor's staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration could lead to complacency or reduced innovation over time.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical facility engineering services may pose a risk if performance degrades.
Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly, leading to increased costs beyond the initial estimates.

Positive Signals

Competitive award process suggests a focus on best value and cost-effectiveness.
Fixed-price contract structure incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
The contractor's success in winning a competitive bid indicates a strong track record and capability in facility engineering.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically focusing on engineering, architectural, and management services for facilities. The federal government is a significant consumer of such services to maintain its vast real estate portfolio. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large federal contracts for facility operations, maintenance, and engineering support across various agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded competitively, and there is no explicit indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements in the provided data. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved as subcontractors or if the prime contractor has a history of engaging small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

As a delivery order under a Federal Supply Schedule (FSS), oversight is typically managed by the contracting officer at the Department of the Interior. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract terms and performance expectations. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Buildings Fund
General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules
Public Buildings Service
Facility Management Services
Engineering Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Long contract duration
Potential for scope creep
Reliance on contractor performance

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $10.1 million to VFA, INC.. FACILITY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ANALYSIS INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE PLANNING.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is VFA, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (Departmental Offices).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-04-03. End: 2008-03-31.

What is the contractor's past performance record with the federal government, particularly on similar facility engineering contracts?

Assessing VFA, Inc.'s past performance is crucial. A review of their contract history within the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would reveal their track record on previous federal awards. Key metrics to examine include on-time delivery, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any past performance evaluations or disputes. For this specific contract, understanding if they have successfully managed similar-sized and scoped projects for the Department of the Interior or other agencies would provide confidence in their ability to meet the current contract's requirements. A history of positive performance reviews and successful contract completions would be a strong indicator of reliability and capability.

How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar facility engineering and technical analysis services?

To benchmark the value, the awarded price of approximately $10 million over five years needs to be compared against prevailing market rates for comparable facility engineering, inspection, and maintenance planning services. This involves analyzing data from industry surveys, commercial cost databases, and potentially other federal contracts awarded under similar conditions (e.g., same Federal Supply Schedule, similar scope). Factors such as geographic location, complexity of facilities, and specific technical requirements influence market rates. If the awarded price is significantly lower than market benchmarks, it suggests excellent value. Conversely, a price substantially higher might indicate potential overpayment or unique service requirements justifying the premium. Without specific market data, a definitive assessment is challenging, but the competitive nature of the award provides some assurance of reasonable pricing.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?

Key risks for this contract include potential contractor underperformance, scope creep, and the long duration (five years) which could lead to outdated technical solutions or reduced contractor responsiveness. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust performance monitoring by the Department of the Interior's contracting officer, clearly defined performance standards and deliverables, and regular progress reviews. The fixed-price contract structure inherently mitigates financial risk for the government by placing cost control responsibility on the contractor. Furthermore, the competitive award process suggests that the contractor was selected based on a demonstrated ability to manage these types of projects effectively, implying a baseline level of risk mitigation through contractor selection.

How effective has the Department of the Interior been in managing facility engineering contracts of this scale historically?

Evaluating the Department of the Interior's historical effectiveness in managing large-scale facility engineering contracts requires analyzing past contract performance data, including contract modifications, disputes, and close-out information. Examining trends in spending, contract durations, and the success rates of competitive procurements within this service category would provide insight. If the Department has a history of successful, on-time, and within-budget contract completions for similar services, it suggests effective program management and oversight capabilities. Conversely, a pattern of cost overruns, significant delays, or contract disputes might indicate challenges in managing these complex service agreements, potentially impacting future contract performance and value.

What is the trend in federal spending on facility engineering and technical analysis services over the past five years?

Analyzing federal spending trends on facility engineering and technical analysis requires aggregating data across multiple agencies and contract types. Over the past five years, spending in this area has likely been influenced by infrastructure investment priorities, aging federal facilities, and security requirements. An upward trend might indicate increased focus on maintaining and modernizing government infrastructure, while a stable or declining trend could suggest budget constraints or shifts in agency priorities. Understanding this broader spending context helps to evaluate whether the $10 million award to the Department of the Interior is consistent with overall federal investment in facility management and engineering support.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Retail Trade › Electronics and Appliance Stores › Computer and Software Stores

Product/Service Code: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT (INCLD FIRMWARE) SOFTWARE,SUPPLIES& SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 266 SUMMER ST, BOSTON, MA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,283,350

Exercised Options: $10,050,626

Current Obligation: $10,050,626

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS35F0118J

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline