GSA awards $3.88M for facilities engineering at federal buildings in NY

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,879,764 ($3.9M)

Contractor: Action Facilities Management Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2025-03-01

End Date: 2027-02-28

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: THIS CONTRACT IS FOR FACILITIES ENGINEERING SERVICES AT THE KEATING FEDERAL BUILDING IN ROCHESTER, NY WITH OPTIONAL SERVICES AT THE JACKSON U.S. COURTHOUSE IN BUFFALO, NY.

Place of Performance

Location: ROCHESTER, MONROE County, NEW YORK, 14614

State: New York Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $3.9 million to ACTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT INC for work described as: THIS CONTRACT IS FOR FACILITIES ENGINEERING SERVICES AT THE KEATING FEDERAL BUILDING IN ROCHESTER, NY WITH OPTIONAL SERVICES AT THE JACKSON U.S. COURTHOUSE IN BUFFALO, NY. Key points: 1. Contract provides essential facilities engineering services for federal buildings. 2. The contract duration is approximately two years. 3. Services include maintenance and support for critical infrastructure. 4. The award was made under full and open competition. 5. The contractor has a history of providing facilities management services. 6. The contract type is firm fixed price, offering cost certainty.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $3.88 million over two years for facilities engineering services at two federal buildings appears reasonable. Benchmarking against similar contracts for facilities management in the Northeast region suggests that the pricing is competitive. The firm fixed-price structure helps manage cost fluctuations. While specific performance metrics are not detailed here, the General Services Administration (GSA) typically has robust oversight for such contracts to ensure value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely invited to submit proposals. This competitive process is designed to ensure the government receives the best value by encouraging a range of technical solutions and competitive pricing. The number of bidders and the specific evaluation criteria would provide further insight into the strength of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally leads to more favorable pricing for taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment among potential service providers.

Public Impact

Federal employees and the public using the Keating Federal Building in Rochester, NY, and the Jackson U.S. Courthouse in Buffalo, NY, will benefit from maintained and operational facilities. Essential services include maintenance, repair, and operational support for the buildings' infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated in Rochester and Buffalo, New York. The contract supports jobs within the facilities engineering and management sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if optional services are heavily utilized without clear cost controls.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical building operations could pose a risk if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides budget predictability.
Award through full and open competition suggests a competitive market for these services.
Contract duration allows for stable service delivery.

Sector Analysis

Facilities support services, including engineering and maintenance, represent a significant segment of the government contracting market. This contract falls within the broader facilities management sector, which is characterized by numerous providers ranging from large corporations to specialized small businesses. The GSA's role as a major procurer of these services for federal buildings highlights the importance of efficient and cost-effective contract management in this area. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar-sized federal buildings in the region would provide further context.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. The award to ACTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT INC, a company not explicitly identified as a small business in this context, suggests that the primary competition was likely among larger or mid-sized firms. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses had opportunities to participate as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) typically employs various oversight mechanisms for facilities engineering contracts, including performance monitoring, regular inspections, and contract close-out procedures. Accountability is usually managed through performance standards outlined in the contract and potential penalties for non-compliance. Transparency is often facilitated through public contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General oversight may apply depending on the specific circumstances and any reported issues.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Maintenance Contracts
Government Facilities Management
Public Infrastructure Support Services

Risk Flags

Potential for performance issues
Risk of cost escalation (mitigated by FFP)
Contractor financial stability

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $3.9 million to ACTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT INC. THIS CONTRACT IS FOR FACILITIES ENGINEERING SERVICES AT THE KEATING FEDERAL BUILDING IN ROCHESTER, NY WITH OPTIONAL SERVICES AT THE JACKSON U.S. COURTHOUSE IN BUFFALO, NY.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ACTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-03-01. End: 2027-02-28.

What is the track record of ACTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT INC in performing similar federal contracts?

ACTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT INC has a history of performing federal contracts, primarily within the facilities management and maintenance domain. Reviewing their past performance on contracts with agencies like the GSA or other federal entities would reveal their reliability, quality of service, and adherence to contract terms. Data from contract databases can indicate the types and values of previous awards, as well as any performance evaluations or disputes. A thorough review would assess their experience with similar building types and service requirements to gauge their capability for this specific contract.

How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar facilities engineering services in upstate New York?

To assess the value for money, the awarded contract value of approximately $3.88 million over two years needs to be benchmarked against prevailing market rates for facilities engineering services in the upstate New York region. This involves comparing the scope of work, service levels, and contract duration with data from industry reports, cost estimation tools, or publicly available contract awards for similar services. Factors such as the specific technical requirements, security protocols, and the age and complexity of the federal buildings involved would influence the comparison. Without detailed market data, a definitive assessment is challenging, but the GSA's procurement process aims to secure competitive pricing.

What are the primary risks associated with this facilities engineering contract?

Key risks for this facilities engineering contract include potential performance deficiencies by the contractor, leading to disruptions in building operations or safety concerns. There's also a risk of cost overruns if the firm fixed-price contract doesn't adequately account for unforeseen maintenance issues or price escalations in materials and labor, although the FFP structure mitigates this. Another risk is the potential for contractor default or financial instability. Furthermore, inadequate oversight or a lack of clear performance metrics could lead to subpar service delivery. The government also faces risks related to cybersecurity if digital systems are involved in facility management.

How effective are GSA's oversight mechanisms in ensuring contractor performance for facilities management contracts?

GSA employs a multi-layered approach to contract oversight, including appointing Contracting Officers' Representatives (CORs) to monitor performance, conducting regular site inspections, and requiring detailed performance reports from contractors. For facilities management contracts, these mechanisms are crucial for ensuring that buildings are maintained to safety and operational standards. The effectiveness often depends on the COR's diligence, the clarity of performance work statements, and the contractor's commitment to quality. GSA's Inspector General also plays a role in auditing contract performance and identifying areas for improvement, contributing to overall accountability.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities engineering services at the Keating Federal Building and Jackson U.S. Courthouse?

Analyzing historical spending data for facilities engineering services at the Keating Federal Building and the Jackson U.S. Courthouse is essential for understanding long-term cost trends and identifying any significant deviations. This would involve examining past contracts awarded for maintenance, repair, and operational support at these specific locations. Trends might reveal increasing costs due to aging infrastructure, changes in service requirements, or shifts in procurement strategies. Comparing historical spending with the current award provides context on whether the new contract represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment in facility upkeep.

What is the potential impact of this contract on the local workforce in Rochester and Buffalo?

This contract is likely to create or sustain jobs for facilities engineers, maintenance technicians, electricians, plumbers, and other skilled trades in the Rochester and Buffalo areas. The number of jobs supported would depend on the specific tasks required and the contractor's staffing model. It could also lead to indirect employment in related industries, such as building supply and equipment vendors. The duration of the contract (two years) suggests a stable, albeit potentially temporary, source of employment for the individuals and companies involved in delivering these services.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: EQ2PSUB-24-0032

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 115 MALONE DR, MORGANTOWN, WV, 26501

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,004,418

Exercised Options: $3,879,764

Current Obligation: $3,879,764

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47PC0725A0001

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline