State Department awards $4.1M facilities support contract to Alutiiq Information Management, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,118,000 ($4.1M)

Contractor: Alutiiq Information Management, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2026-01-31

End Date: 2027-01-30

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: INTERNATIONAL MAINTENANCE NEW TASK ORDER AWARD

Place of Performance

Location: ANCHORAGE, ANCHORAGE County, ALASKA, 99503

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $4.1 million to ALUTIIQ INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, LLC for work described as: INTERNATIONAL MAINTENANCE NEW TASK ORDER AWARD Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price competition. 2. Duration of 364 days suggests a short-term or interim requirement. 3. Facilities Support Services are critical for operational readiness. 4. The contract is a delivery order under a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 5. Geographic location in Alaska may present unique logistical challenges. 6. No small business set-aside was applied to this award.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $4.1 million for a one-year period for facilities support services appears within a reasonable range for specialized support in remote locations. However, without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to definitively benchmark the value for money. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the absence of competition may have led to a higher price than could have been achieved otherwise. Further analysis would require comparison to similar sole-source awards for facilities maintenance in comparable geographic areas.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one contractor was solicited. This approach bypasses the standard competitive process, which typically involves multiple bidders vying for the contract. While sole-source awards can be justified under specific circumstances (e.g., urgent need, unique capabilities), they generally result in less price discovery and potentially higher costs for the government compared to full and open competition. The lack of competition here means taxpayers did not benefit from the potential cost savings that a competitive bidding process could have yielded.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may have paid a premium for these services. Without multiple bids, there is less pressure on the contractor to offer the most competitive price.

Public Impact

The Department of State benefits from the continuity of essential facilities support services. Services include maintenance and support for government facilities, ensuring operational readiness. The contract's geographic impact is focused on Alaska (AK). Workforce implications are likely to involve specialized personnel for facility management and maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
Potential for cost overruns due to lack of competitive benchmarking.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Contractor has an existing relationship (implied by IDIQ structure) which may ensure familiarity with requirements.
Award ensures continued essential facility support services.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services fall under the broader professional, scientific, and technical services sector. This sector is characterized by a wide range of specialized services supporting government and commercial operations. The market size for facilities management is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to maintaining its vast real estate portfolio. This contract represents a specific instance of such spending, likely within a niche requiring specialized expertise or presence in a particular geographic region like Alaska.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses based on the provided data. This means that opportunities for small business participation in fulfilling this contract are not explicitly mandated. The prime contractor, Alutiiq Information Management, LLC, is a large business, and the absence of set-asides suggests that the focus was on securing the required services without specific small business participation goals.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of State's contracting officers and program managers. As a delivery order under an IDIQ, the underlying contract vehicle likely has established oversight mechanisms. Transparency regarding the sole-source justification and performance monitoring would be key. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

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

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competitive justification
Potential for uncompetitive pricing

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $4.1 million to ALUTIIQ INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, LLC. INTERNATIONAL MAINTENANCE NEW TASK ORDER AWARD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALUTIIQ INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-01-31. End: 2027-01-30.

What is the track record of Alutiiq Information Management, LLC with the Department of State and other federal agencies?

Alutiiq Information Management, LLC has a history of performing various support services for federal agencies, including the Department of State. Their contract history often includes IT support, facilities management, and logistics. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those involving facilities support in remote or challenging locations, would provide insight into their capability and reliability. Examining past performance reviews and any documented issues or successes would be crucial for assessing their suitability for this specific task order. Information on contract modifications, past disputes, or performance-related penalties would also be relevant for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar facilities support services awarded competitively?

Benchmarking the pricing of this $4.1 million, one-year facilities support contract against competitively awarded contracts is challenging due to its sole-source nature. Typically, competitive awards allow for price discovery, where multiple bids reveal market rates. Without this, it's difficult to ascertain if the price is optimal. To perform a comparison, one would need to identify similar contracts for facilities support services in Alaska or other remote locations, with similar scope and duration, that were awarded through full and open competition. Analyzing the per-unit costs (if applicable and comparable) or the overall contract value relative to the services provided in those competitive contracts would offer a benchmark. The absence of such a benchmark here suggests a potential risk of overpayment.

What are the specific risks associated with a sole-source award for facilities support in Alaska?

A primary risk of a sole-source award for facilities support in Alaska is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive pressure. Contractors may not feel compelled to offer their most competitive rates when they are the only option. Additionally, there's a risk of reduced service quality or innovation, as the contractor may face less incentive to exceed expectations. The justification for the sole-source award itself carries risk; if it's not robust or if alternative solutions were overlooked, it could indicate poor planning or execution by the agency. Furthermore, relying on a single provider, especially in a geographically challenging area like Alaska, could pose risks if the contractor experiences performance issues or financial instability, potentially disrupting critical facility operations.

What is the expected effectiveness of these facilities support services in ensuring operational readiness for the Department of State in Alaska?

The effectiveness of these facilities support services hinges on the contractor's ability to deliver on the specific requirements outlined in the task order, which are not detailed here but are implied to be critical for operational readiness. Assuming the services encompass essential maintenance, repairs, and upkeep of facilities, their successful execution is vital for maintaining a secure and functional environment for State Department personnel and operations in Alaska. The contractor's expertise, responsiveness, and adherence to service level agreements will directly impact operational continuity. Given the remote nature of Alaska, reliable facilities support is paramount to mitigating risks associated with extreme weather, logistical challenges, and ensuring the safety and efficiency of the facilities.

How does this contract's value and duration compare to historical spending on facilities support by the Department of State?

This $4.1 million contract for a 364-day duration represents a specific investment in facilities support. To compare it to historical spending, one would need to analyze the Department of State's budget and contract awards for facilities maintenance and support services over previous fiscal years. This would involve looking at the total amount spent annually on such services, the average value and duration of individual contracts, and the prevalence of sole-source versus competitive awards. If historical data shows a trend of similar-sized sole-source awards for this type of service in Alaska, it might indicate a pattern. Conversely, if this award deviates significantly from historical norms in terms of value, duration, or procurement method, it warrants further investigation into the specific circumstances driving this particular contract.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3909 ARCTIC BLVD STE 500, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, HUBZone Firm, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $8,236,000

Exercised Options: $8,236,000

Current Obligation: $4,118,000

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: SERVICES PURSUANT TO FAR 12.102(G)

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 19AQMM20D0112

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline