Forest Service awards $393,710 contract for Lake Winfield Scott restoration, focusing on accessibility and deferred maintenance

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $393,710 ($393.7K)

Contractor: Johnson Laschober & Associates PC

Awarding Agency: Department of Agriculture

Start Date: 2023-03-02

End Date: 2027-09-01

Contract Duration: 1,644 days

Daily Burn Rate: $239/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: A & E SERVICES FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE LAKE WINFIELD SCOTT RECREATION AREA TO FULL FUNCTIONALITY, INCREASE ACCESS TO THE DAY USE AREA AND CAMPGROUND TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, ELIMINATE SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, REDU

Place of Performance

Location: SUCHES, UNION County, GEORGIA, 30572

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Agriculture obligated $393,710 to JOHNSON LASCHOBER & ASSOCIATES PC for work described as: A & E SERVICES FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE LAKE WINFIELD SCOTT RECREATION AREA TO FULL FUNCTIONALITY, INCREASE ACCESS TO THE DAY USE AREA AND CAMPGROUND TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, ELIMINATE SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, REDU Key points: 1. Contract aims to enhance accessibility for individuals with disabilities in day use and campground areas. 2. Addresses several thousand dollars of deferred maintenance, improving the overall condition of the recreation area. 3. The contract is a firm fixed-price definitive contract, providing cost certainty for the government. 4. The project is located in Georgia, with potential implications for local tourism and recreation. 5. The contractor, Johnson Laschober & Associates PC, will provide architectural services for the restoration. 6. The contract duration is 1644 days, indicating a significant restoration effort.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $393,710 for architectural services for a recreation area restoration appears reasonable given the scope. However, without specific benchmarks for similar restoration projects or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price nature provides cost control, but the absence of competition limits the opportunity for price discovery and potential savings.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source award. The reasons for this approach are not detailed in the provided data. Sole-source contracts can sometimes lead to higher prices due to the lack of competitive pressure. The absence of multiple bidders means the government did not explore alternative solutions or pricing structures that might have been available through a competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition means taxpayers may not have received the most cost-effective solution. Without a bidding process, it's difficult to ascertain if the awarded price reflects fair market value.

Public Impact

Recreational users of Lake Winfield Scott, particularly those with disabilities, will benefit from improved access and facilities. The restoration project will enhance the overall visitor experience and safety at the recreation area. Local communities in Georgia may see indirect economic benefits through increased tourism and recreational activity. The project will address critical deferred maintenance, preserving a valuable natural resource for future generations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than a competed contract.
Limited transparency into the justification for a sole-source award.
Potential for scope creep in a long-duration project without competitive oversight.

Positive Signals

Focus on improving accessibility for persons with disabilities aligns with federal equity goals.
Addressing deferred maintenance ensures the long-term viability of a public recreation area.
Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for the Forest Service.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Architectural Services sector (NAICS 541310). This sector provides services for the planning and design of buildings and infrastructure. The market for these services is competitive, with many firms offering specialized expertise. The Forest Service, as part of the Department of Agriculture, frequently procures such services for land management and facility development projects. Benchmarking would typically involve comparing rates and project costs against similar government or private sector architectural contracts for park and recreation facilities.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not competed and there is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. This means that small businesses were not specifically targeted for this particular award, and their participation is not guaranteed through contractual obligations. The impact on the small business ecosystem is neutral in this instance, as there was no direct solicitation or award to small entities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the U.S. Forest Service contracting officer and project managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency could be enhanced by publicly detailing the justification for the sole-source award and making project progress reports accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

National Forest System Infrastructure Projects
Recreation Area Management and Development
Accessibility Improvement Projects
Deferred Maintenance Backlog Reduction

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
Potential for higher costs due to lack of competition.
Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Agriculture awarded $393,710 to JOHNSON LASCHOBER & ASSOCIATES PC. A & E SERVICES FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE LAKE WINFIELD SCOTT RECREATION AREA TO FULL FUNCTIONALITY, INCREASE ACCESS TO THE DAY USE AREA AND CAMPGROUND TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, ELIMINATE SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, REDU

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JOHNSON LASCHOBER & ASSOCIATES PC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Agriculture (Forest Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $393,710.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-03-02. End: 2027-09-01.

What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data does not specify the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis. Typically, sole-source awards are made when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the government's needs. This could be due to unique qualifications, specialized expertise, or urgent requirements where a competitive process would be impractical or detrimental. Without further information, it is impossible to determine the exact rationale, but common reasons include proprietary technology, existing infrastructure compatibility, or a lack of qualified bidders in the relevant geographic area or specialization. A detailed justification document should exist within the agency's procurement file.

How does the awarded amount compare to similar architectural services contracts for recreation area restoration?

Comparing the awarded amount of $393,710 for architectural services for the Lake Winfield Scott restoration requires access to a broader dataset of similar federal or state contracts. Factors such as the size and complexity of the recreation area, the specific scope of restoration (e.g., structural, environmental, accessibility), and the geographic location all influence pricing. Generally, architectural services fees can range from 5% to 15% of the total construction cost, depending on the project's complexity and the services provided. Without knowing the estimated construction cost or detailed service inclusions, a direct comparison is difficult. However, for a project focused on accessibility and deferred maintenance, this value appears to be within a plausible range, though a competitive process would have provided a clearer market benchmark.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract?

The primary risks associated with this sole-source contract include potential overpricing due to the lack of competition, limited innovation from the contractor as there's no competitive pressure to offer better solutions, and a potential lack of contractor incentive to perform efficiently if they perceive less oversight. There's also a risk that the contractor may not possess the most optimal or cost-effective approach compared to what might have been available through a competitive bidding process. Furthermore, the absence of multiple bidders might indicate a limited market for these specialized services or a failure by the agency to adequately market the requirement, both of which could be considered risks to achieving best value for the government.

What is the expected impact of this restoration on visitor access and user experience?

This restoration project is specifically designed to increase access to the day use area and campground for persons with disabilities, which is a significant improvement in user experience for this demographic. By eliminating deferred maintenance, the project will also address safety concerns and improve the overall aesthetic and functional quality of the recreation area. Visitors can expect improved facilities, potentially better trails, updated amenities, and a more reliable and enjoyable experience. The restoration aims to bring the Lake Winfield Scott Recreation Area to full functionality, suggesting a comprehensive upgrade that will benefit all visitors by enhancing the natural beauty and usability of the site.

What is the historical spending pattern for architectural services by the Forest Service in Georgia?

Historical spending data for architectural services by the Forest Service in Georgia would require a detailed analysis of past contract awards. Generally, the Forest Service, as a major land management agency, consistently procures architectural and engineering services for a variety of projects, including facility construction, renovation, trail development, and visitor center improvements across its numerous units. Spending patterns are influenced by budget allocations, national priorities (like infrastructure investment or accessibility mandates), and the specific needs of regional forests. Georgia, with its diverse national forests and recreation areas, would likely represent a consistent, albeit not necessarily the largest, portion of the Forest Service's architectural services procurement portfolio. Specific figures would necessitate querying federal procurement databases for contracts awarded to NAICS code 541310 within the Forest Service's Georgia operations over several fiscal years.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1296 BROAD ST, AUGUSTA, GA, 30901

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $393,710

Exercised Options: $393,710

Current Obligation: $393,710

Actual Outlays: $350,450

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline