GSA awards $12M+ engineering services contract to Advanced Systems Technology & Management, Inc. for 4 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,989,994 ($12.0M)

Contractor: Advanced Systems Technology & Management, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2022-05-01

End Date: 2026-04-30

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ANALYSIS SERVICE SOLUTIONS FOR EACH TASK ASSET 20

Place of Performance

Location: HILL AFB, DAVIS County, UTAH, 84056

State: Utah Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $12.0 million to ADVANCED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, INC. for work described as: ANALYSIS SERVICE SOLUTIONS FOR EACH TASK ASSET 20 Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the duration and scope of engineering services. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. No specific risk indicators are immediately apparent from the provided data. 4. This contract falls under engineering services, a common category for federal agencies. 5. The contract is positioned within the General Services Administration's Federal Acquisition Service. 6. The firm fixed price contract type helps manage cost certainty.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of over $11.9 million for a four-year period for engineering services is within a reasonable range for federal contracts of this nature. Benchmarking against similar engineering service contracts awarded by GSA or other agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed price structure offers cost predictability for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded prior to the final award. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' nature suggests a robust competitive environment, which generally leads to better price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple vendors to bid, driving down prices and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the General Services Administration, which will receive engineering services. The services delivered are categorized as engineering services, supporting various federal tasks. The contract is based in Utah, indicating a potential geographic focus for service delivery or contractor presence. The contract supports the federal workforce by engaging a private sector contractor for specialized engineering needs.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty.
Full and Open Competition suggests a competitive award process.
Contract duration of 4 years allows for sustained support.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS code 541330). This sector is crucial for supporting federal infrastructure, technology development, and operational needs. Spending in this area is consistent with government requirements for specialized technical expertise. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other engineering service contracts awarded by GSA and other federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb fields) is false, meaning this contract was not set aside for small businesses and there is no explicit indication of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that larger, established firms were likely the primary focus of the competition.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officers and program managers within the General Services Administration. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration Contracts
Engineering Services Contracts
Federal IT Services
Professional Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Risk of scope creep or unforeseen issues with FFP contract type.
Lack of detailed past performance data for the contractor.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $12.0 million to ADVANCED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, INC.. ANALYSIS SERVICE SOLUTIONS FOR EACH TASK ASSET 20

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ADVANCED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-05-01. End: 2026-04-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for Advanced Systems Technology & Management, Inc. with the federal government?

To assess the historical spending pattern of Advanced Systems Technology & Management, Inc. (AST&M), a review of federal procurement databases such as FPDS-NG or USASpending.gov would be necessary. This would involve searching for all contracts awarded to AST&M across various agencies and contract types. Key metrics to analyze would include the total dollar value of contracts over time, the types of services or goods provided, the agencies they have served, and the duration of these contracts. Understanding their past performance, contract renewals, and any reported issues or successes would provide context for their current $11.9M GSA award. A significant history of successful contract performance with GSA or similar agencies would indicate a lower risk profile for this new award.

How does the awarded price compare to similar engineering service contracts?

Benchmarking this $11.9 million contract against similar engineering service contracts requires identifying comparable awards based on scope, duration, agency, and service complexity. For instance, comparing it to other GSA Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) contracts for engineering services awarded within the last 1-2 years, with similar durations (e.g., 3-5 years) and firm-fixed-price structures, would be informative. If this contract's average annual value ($~3 million/year) is significantly lower or higher than comparable contracts, it could indicate either exceptional value or potential underpricing/overpricing. Without access to a detailed database of comparable contract pricing, a precise benchmark is difficult, but the current award appears within a typical range for multi-year engineering support.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract award?

The primary risks associated with this contract award appear to be moderate. Given the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award type, there's a slight risk that the exclusion of certain sources might have limited the competitive landscape more than intended, potentially impacting price or innovation. The firm fixed price (FFP) contract type, while good for cost control, can introduce risk if the scope of work is not precisely defined, potentially leading to change orders or contractor claims if unforeseen complexities arise. Contractor performance risk is also present, though the provided data doesn't detail AST&M's past performance record. Finally, the geographic concentration in Utah might pose logistical challenges if services require broader national deployment.

How effective is the General Services Administration in managing engineering service contracts?

The effectiveness of the General Services Administration (GSA) in managing engineering service contracts can be evaluated through several lenses. GSA's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) is a major provider of acquisition solutions, and its experience suggests a generally effective framework for managing a wide array of contracts, including engineering services. Key indicators of effectiveness include the utilization of competitive contracting methods like 'full and open competition,' the use of appropriate contract types like FFP for cost certainty, and the establishment of clear performance standards. However, effectiveness can vary based on individual contracting officer expertise, program complexity, and the specific oversight mechanisms in place for each contract. Publicly available data on contract performance metrics, past performance reviews, and any IG reports related to GSA's contract management would offer a more definitive assessment.

What is the typical duration and value for engineering services contracts awarded by GSA?

The typical duration and value for engineering services contracts awarded by GSA can vary significantly based on the specific services required, the agency's needs, and the overall federal budget. However, contracts like this one, with a duration of four years and a value exceeding $11.9 million, are not uncommon. Many engineering service contracts awarded by GSA are firm-fixed-price and can range from one to five years, with total values often in the millions or tens of millions of dollars, especially for complex projects or long-term support requirements. The $3 million annual average value for this contract is consistent with many professional and engineering services engagements within the federal government.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 47QFRA22R0003

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7925 JONES BRANCH DR STE 5400, MCLEAN, VA, 22102

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,020,024

Exercised Options: $12,020,024

Current Obligation: $11,989,994

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADS102

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline