DoD's $17.5M Facilities Support Services Contract with LB & B Associates Inc. Awarded in 2008

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,545,596 ($17.5M)

Contractor: LB & B Associates Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-10-01

End Date: 2009-09-30

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $48.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: OPTION PERIOD FOUR - LEVEL I SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: FORT LEONARD WOOD, PULASKI County, MISSOURI, 65473

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.5 million to LB & B ASSOCIATES INC for work described as: OPTION PERIOD FOUR - LEVEL I SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract value of $17.5 million over its base period suggests a significant investment in facilities support. 2. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' contract type indicates performance incentives tied to achieving specific objectives. 3. The 'Facilities Support Services' category (NAICS 561210) encompasses a broad range of operational and maintenance activities. 4. Awarded in 2008, this contract has a substantial performance history, allowing for evaluation of long-term effectiveness. 5. The 'Department of the Army' as the awarding agency points to a focus on military installation support. 6. The contract's duration of 364 days for the base period is typical for service contracts of this nature. 7. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this was not specifically targeted for small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract requires more granular data on the specific services provided and the scope of facilities managed. However, a $17.5 million contract for facilities support over a year is substantial. Without comparable contracts for similar installations or service levels, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure implies that the government aims to achieve good value by incentivizing performance, but the ultimate cost-effectiveness depends on the award fee payouts and the contractor's efficiency.

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 offers. This typically suggests a competitive bidding process designed to achieve the best value for the government. The number of bids received (10) is a healthy indicator of market interest and competition for this type of service. A robust competition level generally leads to more favorable pricing and service offerings for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition for a contract of this magnitude is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining competitive pricing and high-quality services, thereby maximizing the return on investment for public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the personnel and operations of the Department of the Army installations supported by these facilities services. Services delivered likely include maintenance, repair, custodial services, groundskeeping, and potentially other operational support functions for military facilities. The geographic impact is concentrated in Missouri, where the contract is being performed. Workforce implications include the direct employment of personnel by LB & B Associates Inc. and potentially its subcontractors to perform the contracted services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if award fee criteria are not tightly managed.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical facilities support could pose a risk if performance degrades.
Ensuring consistent service quality across all aspects of facilities management requires diligent oversight.

Positive Signals

The 'Full and Open Competition' process suggests a strong initial market assessment and potential for competitive pricing.
The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure incentivizes contractor performance and alignment with government objectives.
A significant number of bidders (10) indicates a healthy market for these services and a good selection pool.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services, categorized under NAICS code 561210, represents a significant segment of the government contracting market. This sector includes a wide array of services essential for the operation and maintenance of government facilities, ranging from routine upkeep to specialized technical support. The Department of Defense is a major consumer of these services due to the vast number of installations it manages globally. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot or per facility managed across different agencies and contract types.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have been set aside for small businesses, as indicated by 'sb': false. Therefore, the primary contractor, LB & B Associates Inc., is likely a larger entity. While there are no direct set-aside benefits for small businesses, the contract may still offer subcontracting opportunities. The extent of these opportunities would depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the specific requirements of the facilities support services. Analysis of subcontracting would be necessary to determine the actual impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are embedded within the 'Cost Plus Award Fee' structure, which links contractor compensation to performance outcomes. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support (BOS)
Logistics and Supply Chain Management
Maintenance, Repair, and Operations (MRO)
Real Property Management
Installation and Facilities Management Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPAF structure.
Contract performance monitoring complexity.
Dependence on contractor for critical infrastructure support.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.5 million to LB & B ASSOCIATES INC. OPTION PERIOD FOUR - LEVEL I SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LB & B ASSOCIATES 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 $17.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-10-01. End: 2009-09-30.

What is the track record of LB & B Associates Inc. with federal contracts, particularly in facilities support?

LB & B Associates Inc. has a history of securing federal contracts, including those related to facilities support and base operations. A review of their contract portfolio would reveal the types of services they have provided, the agencies they have served, and the contract values. Analyzing past performance evaluations, such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) data, would offer insights into their reliability, quality of service, and adherence to contract terms. Understanding their experience with similar contract types (e.g., Cost Plus Award Fee) and their ability to manage large-scale operations is crucial for assessing their suitability for this specific contract.

How does the $17.5 million contract value compare to similar facilities support contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

To benchmark the $17.5 million contract value, one would need to compare it against facilities support contracts of similar scope, duration, and geographic location awarded by the Department of the Army or other branches of the DoD. Key comparison metrics include cost per square foot, cost per facility managed, or cost per service provided. Factors such as the age and type of facilities, the specific services included (e.g., janitorial, HVAC maintenance, groundskeeping), and the labor costs in the performance region (Missouri) would influence the expected price. Without access to detailed service requirements and performance data for comparable contracts, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the $17.5 million figure suggests a substantial commitment to maintaining military infrastructure.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract for facilities support?

The primary risks associated with a CPAF contract for facilities support revolve around cost control and the definition of award criteria. While CPAF incentivizes performance, there's a risk that the government may pay higher total costs than with a fixed-price contract if the contractor consistently achieves high performance ratings. Ensuring that the award fee criteria are objective, measurable, and directly tied to desired outcomes is critical to prevent 'fee creep' and ensure that award payments reflect genuine value. Additionally, the administrative burden of monitoring performance and determining award fees can be significant for the government. Contractor focus might shift towards achieving award fee targets rather than optimizing overall cost efficiency if not managed carefully.

How effective has LB & B Associates Inc. been in meeting performance objectives under this specific contract, based on available data?

Assessing the effectiveness of LB & B Associates Inc. under this specific contract requires access to performance evaluation reports, such as CPARS data, which are not publicly available in this dataset. These reports would detail the contractor's performance against key metrics, including timeliness, quality of service, cost control, and adherence to contract requirements. Without this specific performance data, it's impossible to definitively state how effective they have been. However, the fact that the contract is proceeding through option periods (implied by 'OPTION PERIOD FOUR') suggests a level of satisfaction with their performance, at least sufficient to continue the engagement.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services by the Department of the Army in Missouri?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities support services by the Department of the Army in Missouri would involve aggregating contract data for NAICS code 561210 (Facilities Support Services) and related categories awarded to various contractors within that state over several fiscal years. This would reveal patterns in contract values, the number of contracts awarded, and the types of services procured. Such an analysis could identify periods of increased or decreased spending, highlight major contract vehicles, and potentially indicate shifts in the Army's reliance on contracted services for facility management in the region. This specific contract represents a portion of that historical spending.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 9891 BROKEN LAND PARKWAY,, COLUMBIA, MD, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,545,596

Exercised Options: $17,545,596

Current Obligation: $17,545,596

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W911S704D0018

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline