DoD's $38M Facilities O&M Services contract awarded to J & J Maintenance Inc. shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $38,121,657 ($38.1M)

Contractor: J & J Maintenance Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-10-01

End Date: 2015-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,795 days

Daily Burn Rate: $21.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FACILITY O&M SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: COLORADO SPRINGS, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80913

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $38.1 million to J & J MAINTENANCE INC for work described as: FACILITY O&M SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract represents a significant investment in maintaining critical Department of Defense facilities. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding process for this service contract. 3. The contract duration of nearly five years indicates a need for sustained facility support. 4. Performance context is crucial for understanding the effectiveness of J & J Maintenance Inc.'s services. 5. This contract falls within the broader Facilities Support Services sector, a key area for government operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of approximately $38.1 million over 1795 days suggests a daily expenditure of around $21,238. Benchmarking this against similar facilities maintenance contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, the firm-fixed-price structure implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for value if managed effectively. The number of bids received (2) is on the lower side for a contract of this magnitude, which might suggest limited competition impacting price discovery.

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 bids. However, with only two bids received, the level of competition was limited. This could potentially lead to less aggressive pricing than a more robustly competed contract. The agency's decision to proceed with two bidders suggests they met the minimum requirements, but further analysis of the bidding process and the nature of the services could reveal if a broader range of potential contractors was aware of or able to participate.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition, even under full and open procedures, may result in higher costs for taxpayers compared to scenarios with more bidders vying for the contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel, who rely on well-maintained facilities for operational readiness. Services delivered include essential facility operations and maintenance, ensuring the functionality and safety of military installations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Colorado, where the facilities are located. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for maintenance staff and support personnel managed by J & J Maintenance Inc.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited number of bidders (2) may indicate potential issues with market reach or contractor interest, possibly impacting price.
The contract duration of nearly five years requires ongoing monitoring to ensure sustained performance and value.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the quality and efficiency of services provided.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, allowing for broad market participation.
Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
The contract addresses essential facility maintenance needs for a critical government agency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services industry, a broad category encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and upkeep of government and commercial properties. The market for these services is substantial, driven by the government's extensive real estate portfolio. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot for similar maintenance services across different federal agencies and geographic locations. The $38.1 million award over five years for facilities maintenance in Colorado is a significant, but not unusual, expenditure for a large military installation.

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 small business set-aside. The prime contractor, J & J Maintenance Inc., is responsible for fulfilling the contract requirements, and any subcontracting decisions would be at their discretion, not mandated by a set-aside provision.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contract administration team within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support Services
Facilities Engineering and Maintenance
Government Property Management
Logistics and Support Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition may impact price.
Potential for scope creep or unforeseen maintenance needs impacting contractor profitability and service quality.
Performance monitoring is critical due to the long contract duration.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $38.1 million to J & J MAINTENANCE INC. FACILITY O&M SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J & J MAINTENANCE 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 $38.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-10-01. End: 2015-08-31.

What is the track record of J & J Maintenance Inc. with federal contracts, particularly in facilities maintenance?

Analyzing the track record of J & J Maintenance Inc. requires accessing historical contract data. Without specific details on past performance, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability and quality of service. However, being awarded a nearly $38 million contract by the Department of the Army suggests a level of capability and past success in securing government work. Further investigation into past performance reviews, any contract disputes, or awards for similar services would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their experience and suitability for this role. It's important to note that contract performance can vary significantly across different projects and agencies.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar facilities maintenance contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies?

Direct price comparison is challenging without detailed service scopes and performance metrics. The average daily cost of approximately $21,238 for facilities maintenance is a starting point. To benchmark effectively, one would need to compare this against contracts for similar-sized facilities, in comparable geographic regions, and with similar service requirements (e.g., HVAC, janitorial, groundskeeping, minor repairs). Factors like labor costs, local market rates, and the complexity of the facilities significantly influence pricing. A comprehensive analysis would involve identifying comparable contracts and adjusting for these variables to determine if the $38.1 million award represents good value for money.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of J & J Maintenance Inc. under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, facilities maintenance contracts include metrics related to response times for service requests, completion rates for scheduled maintenance, uptime of critical systems (like HVAC or power), cleanliness standards, and safety compliance. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests that meeting these defined service levels is crucial for the contractor's profitability. Without access to the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Service Level Agreements (SLAs), a detailed assessment of performance measurement is not possible. These KPIs are essential for ensuring the government receives the expected quality and value.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities maintenance services by the Department of the Army in Colorado?

To determine the historical spending trend for facilities maintenance services by the Department of the Army in Colorado, one would need to analyze aggregated contract data over several fiscal years. This would involve querying databases for contracts awarded by the Army within the specified geographic region and categorized under facilities support services (NAICS code 561210 or similar). Examining this trend would reveal whether spending has been consistent, increasing, or decreasing, and how this $38.1 million award fits into the broader budgetary picture for facility upkeep in the region. It could also highlight any significant shifts in contracting strategies or service providers over time.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for facilities maintenance services, especially over a multi-year period?

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts, while shifting cost risk to the contractor, can present risks in multi-year facilities maintenance scenarios. If the scope of work is not precisely defined or if unforeseen maintenance issues arise (e.g., aging infrastructure failures), the contractor might incur costs exceeding the fixed price, potentially leading to reduced profit margins or attempts to cut corners on service quality to maintain profitability. Conversely, if the contractor is highly efficient and costs are lower than anticipated, the government might have overpaid relative to the actual effort. Effective oversight is crucial to ensure the contractor maintains service quality throughout the contract duration and that the fixed price remains fair value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W912DY09R0027

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7710 RIALTO BLVD SUITE 200, AUSTIN, TX, 78735

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,121,657

Exercised Options: $38,121,657

Current Obligation: $38,121,657

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912DY10D0051

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline