Department of the Army awards $13.1M contract to Versar, Inc. for support services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,144,762 ($13.1M)

Contractor: Versar, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-04-12

End Date: 2007-04-11

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.1 million to VERSAR, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the duration and scope of support services. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process. 3. Contract duration of one year with options indicates potential for follow-on work. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. Contract awarded to a single vendor, Versar, Inc., with no indication of small business set-aside. 6. Agency is the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Army.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $13.1 million over a 364-day period suggests an average annual value of approximately $13.1 million. Without specific details on the services rendered, direct comparison to similar contracts is challenging. However, the firm fixed-price structure implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the contractor performs efficiently. The number of bids received (2) is on the lower side for a full and open competition, which might warrant further investigation into pricing competitiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The data shows two bids were received. While two bidders participated, the level of competition could be considered moderate. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more aggressive pricing and a wider range of technical solutions, potentially benefiting the government. The limited number of bids might suggest barriers to entry or a niche market for these specific support services.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best value through a competitive marketplace. However, with only two bids, there is a possibility that the pricing may not have been as aggressively driven down as it could have been with more participants.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary of this contract is the Department of the Army, receiving essential support services. The services provided are critical for the operational readiness and administrative functions of the Army. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the Army's operational areas, though specific locations are not detailed. Workforce implications would involve personnel employed by Versar, Inc. to fulfill the contract requirements.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited number of bidders (2) in a full and open competition could indicate potential issues with market reach or contractor interest.
Lack of detail on specific services provided makes it difficult to fully assess performance and value.
No indication of small business participation or subcontracting plans.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type effectively transfers cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition process, in principle, allows for broad market participation.
Contract duration of one year with options provides flexibility for the agency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, a broad category encompassing a wide range of support functions for government agencies. The Department of Defense is a significant consumer of such services, utilizing them for everything from logistics and maintenance to research and analysis. The market for these services is competitive, with numerous firms vying for government contracts. Benchmarking this contract's value would require detailed service descriptions and comparison against similar support contracts within the defense sector.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss=false, sb=false). There is no information regarding subcontracting plans. This suggests that large businesses were likely the primary participants and potential awardees. The absence of small business set-asides means that opportunities for small businesses to directly participate in this specific contract are limited, though they might be involved as subcontractors if Versar, Inc. chooses to engage them.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the administrative contracting officer within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, where the contractor is responsible for delivering specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports are often not publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Support Services
Army Logistics and Readiness Contracts
Professional and Technical Services Contracts
Government Support Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition (2 bidders) for a full and open contract.
Lack of detailed service description hinders comprehensive value assessment.
No explicit mention of small business participation or subcontracting.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.1 million to VERSAR, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is VERSAR, 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 $13.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-04-12. End: 2007-04-11.

What specific support services were provided under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the support services rendered under this $13.1 million Department of the Army contract awarded to Versar, Inc. Support services in the defense sector can encompass a wide array of functions, including but not limited to, administrative support, logistical assistance, technical maintenance, facilities management, cybersecurity, and program management. Without a detailed Statement of Work (SOW) or contract line item numbers (CLINs), it is impossible to ascertain the precise deliverables. Understanding the specific services is crucial for evaluating the contract's value, performance, and relevance to the Army's mission.

How does the per-unit cost of these services compare to market rates or similar government contracts?

Determining a meaningful per-unit cost for this contract is challenging without knowing the specific services provided and the quantity or units of measure. The total award value is $13,144,761.78 over 364 days. If we were to assume a simplified scenario where the contract was purely for labor hours, and assuming a standard 2080 work hours per year, the average hourly rate would be approximately $6,320,000 / 2080 hours = $3,038 per hour. This figure is likely not representative of a true per-unit cost as it doesn't account for overhead, profit, or the specific nature of the services. A true benchmark would require comparing the cost of specific deliverables (e.g., cost per maintenance action, cost per report generated, cost per hour of specialized technical support) against industry standards and similar government contracts.

What is Versar, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies?

Versar, Inc. has a history of contracting with the U.S. federal government, including the Department of Defense. Analyzing their broader track record would involve reviewing their past performance on similar contracts, including on-time delivery, quality of services, and adherence to budget. Information on past performance evaluations, any contract disputes, or awards for exceptional performance would provide further insight into their reliability and capability. A comprehensive review would look at the volume and value of contracts previously awarded to Versar, Inc. by the DoD and other agencies to gauge their experience and success rate in fulfilling government requirements.

What are the potential risks associated with this contract, and how are they being managed?

Potential risks for this contract include scope creep, where the requirements may expand beyond the original agreement, leading to cost increases or delays, although the firm fixed-price nature mitigates direct cost overrun risk for the government. Performance risk exists if Versar, Inc. fails to deliver the required services to the specified standard. Given the limited competition (2 bidders), there's a risk that the government did not receive the most competitive pricing. Management of these risks would involve robust contract oversight, clear performance metrics, regular communication between the agency and the contractor, and potentially exercising contract clauses for non-performance. The fixed-price structure inherently places performance and cost risk on the contractor.

How does this contract's value compare to historical spending patterns for similar services within the Department of the Army?

To compare this contract's value ($13.1 million) to historical spending patterns, one would need to identify comparable service categories within the Department of the Army's budget. This involves searching historical contract databases for awards with similar North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes or Product Service Codes (PSCs) and similar scopes of work. Analyzing trends in annual spending, average contract values, and the number of contracts awarded over several fiscal years for these services would provide context. If historical data shows similar contracts typically range from $10-15 million annually, then this award appears within a normal range. Conversely, if historical spending has been significantly lower or higher, it might indicate a change in requirements, market conditions, or pricing.

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: 6850 VERSAR CENTER, STE 1, SPRINGFIELD, VA, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912ER06D0004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline