DoD's $17.8M environmental support contract with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. awarded in 2008

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,863,474 ($17.9M)

Contractor: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-09-29

End Date: 2018-09-29

Contract Duration: 3,652 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FTW 353 ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WAINWRIGHT, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR County, ALASKA, 99703

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.9 million to JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC for work described as: FTW 353 ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in environmental remediation services. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a robust bidding process for this service. 3. Long contract duration may indicate complex or ongoing environmental needs. 4. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 5. Geographic focus on Alaska points to specific environmental challenges in the region. 6. The absence of small business set-asides warrants further investigation into subcontracting opportunities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $17.8 million over a 10-year period averages to $1.78 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale environmental remediation contracts is challenging without more specific service details. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, while common for complex services, can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fee that is adjusted based on performance. The pricing strategy here would depend heavily on the specific remediation tasks and the associated risks and complexities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. With 6 bidders participating, this suggests a healthy level of competition for the environmental support services. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down costs and ensured the government received competitive pricing for these essential environmental services.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from specialized environmental remediation services to address contamination and ensure compliance. Services delivered likely include site assessment, cleanup, monitoring, and waste management. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alaska, addressing unique environmental conditions and potential hazards in the state. The contract supports a workforce skilled in environmental science, engineering, and hazardous material handling.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to the Cost Plus Award Fee structure if performance metrics are not rigorously monitored.
Long contract duration (10 years) could lead to contractor complacency or a lack of agility in adapting to new environmental regulations or technologies.
Limited transparency on specific performance metrics and award fee determinations within the public domain.
Lack of explicit small business set-aside may limit opportunities for smaller specialized environmental firms.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, ensuring a broad range of potential providers were considered.
Multiple bidders (6) indicate a competitive environment that likely benefited the government.
The contract addresses critical environmental support needs for the Department of Defense.
The Cost Plus Award Fee structure, if managed effectively, can incentivize high performance and quality outcomes.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Consulting and Remediation Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional services industry supporting government operations. The market for environmental services is substantial, driven by regulatory compliance, legacy contamination issues, and ongoing operational needs. This contract with the Department of the Army represents a significant, long-term engagement within this sector, likely involving complex site remediation and environmental management specific to military installations or operational areas, particularly in challenging environments like Alaska.

Small Business Impact

This contract did not include a small business set-aside. While awarded through full and open competition, the absence of a specific set-aside means that opportunities for small businesses would primarily come through subcontracting. It is important to assess whether Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. has robust subcontracting plans that effectively engage the small business ecosystem for specialized environmental services, thereby ensuring broader economic participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Award Fee contract would typically involve the contracting officer and their representatives (CORs) monitoring contractor performance against defined metrics and allowable costs. The Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices are responsible for ensuring accountability. Transparency is often limited for specific performance evaluations and award fee decisions, but the contract's existence and basic terms are publicly available through federal procurement databases.

Related Government Programs

Environmental Remediation Services
Defense Environmental Programs
Alaska Environmental Services
Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts
Professional Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may reduce flexibility.
CPAF structure requires diligent oversight to control costs.
Lack of explicit small business focus.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.9 million to JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC. FTW 353 ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JACOBS ENGINEERING 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 $17.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-09-29. End: 2018-09-29.

What specific environmental remediation tasks were performed under this contract, and how did they align with the initial scope of work?

The contract, 'FTW 353 ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT,' was awarded to Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. by the Department of the Army. While the specific tasks are not detailed in the provided data, contracts of this nature typically encompass a range of environmental services such as site investigation, risk assessment, hazardous waste management, soil and groundwater remediation, demolition, and long-term monitoring. Given the 10-year duration and the location in Alaska, the scope likely involved addressing legacy contamination from past military activities or managing ongoing environmental compliance for operational bases. The alignment with the initial scope would be assessed through regular performance reviews and reporting by the government's contracting officer's representative (COR) throughout the contract's life.

How does the average annual cost of $1.78 million compare to similar environmental support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense in Alaska?

Comparing the average annual cost of $1.78 million requires detailed benchmarking against contracts with similar scope, complexity, and duration, specifically within Alaska and for the Department of Defense. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts, a precise comparison is difficult. However, environmental remediation in Alaska can be significantly more expensive due to logistical challenges, harsh climate, remote locations, and specialized environmental conditions. Therefore, $1.78 million annually might be considered reasonable or even cost-effective if it covers extensive remediation activities in such a demanding environment. A thorough analysis would involve examining contract types (e.g., fixed-price vs. cost-plus), specific services rendered, and the number of bidders.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. under this Cost Plus Award Fee contract?

For a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are crucial for determining the contractor's performance and the associated award fee. While the specific KPIs for this contract are not publicly detailed, they typically revolve around factors such as technical performance (quality of work, adherence to standards), schedule adherence (timeliness of deliverables and milestones), cost control (managing within budget projections), safety performance, and compliance with contract requirements and regulations. The government's COR would monitor these KPIs throughout the contract period, providing regular assessments that feed into the final award fee determination. The objective is to incentivize superior performance beyond basic contract requirements.

What is the historical spending pattern for environmental support services by the Department of the Army in Alaska over the last 15 years?

Analyzing the historical spending pattern for environmental support services by the Department of the Army in Alaska over the last 15 years would require accessing and aggregating data from federal procurement databases like FPDS-NG. This contract, awarded in 2008 and ending in 2018, represents a portion of that spending. To establish a pattern, one would look at the total annual obligated amounts for relevant NAICS codes (like 562910 - Remediation Services) awarded by the Army in Alaska. This would reveal trends in spending, identify major contractors, and highlight periods of increased or decreased investment in environmental services, potentially influenced by regulatory changes, base realignment, or specific environmental cleanup initiatives.

Given the 10-year duration, what mechanisms were in place to ensure the contractor remained innovative and responsive to evolving environmental technologies and regulations?

Ensuring innovation and responsiveness over a 10-year contract, especially in a field like environmental services, relies on several mechanisms. For a CPAF contract, the performance metrics themselves can be structured to reward adoption of new, cost-effective technologies or compliance with updated regulations. Contract modifications or task orders could be used to incorporate new requirements or technologies. Furthermore, regular performance reviews and strategic discussions between the government and the contractor are essential. The contract might also include clauses that allow for equitable adjustments or incentivize the contractor to propose innovative solutions. However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms depends heavily on active government oversight and a willingness to adapt the contract as needed.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR RESTOR ACVIVS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W911KB05R0001

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1111 S ARROYO PKWY, PASADENA, CA, 91105

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,863,474

Exercised Options: $17,863,474

Current Obligation: $17,863,474

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W911KB06D0006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline