DOT awards $10.4M contract for FAA facilities maintenance, highlighting strong competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,449,083 ($10.4M)

Contractor: King & George, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2025-01-16

End Date: 2025-12-31

Contract Duration: 349 days

Daily Burn Rate: $29.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 6973GH-24-F-00280 MMAC O&M CONTRACT

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73169

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $10.4 million to KING & GEORGE, LLC for work described as: 6973GH-24-F-00280 MMAC O&M CONTRACT Key points: 1. Contract value of $10.4M for one year of operations and maintenance services. 2. Awarded to KING & GEORGE, LLC, a single contractor. 3. Full and open competition after exclusion of sources indicates a deliberate bidding process. 4. The contract is firm-fixed-price, aligning costs with performance. 5. Services are for facilities support, crucial for operational continuity. 6. Geographic focus on Oklahoma, with a delivery order ending in December 2025.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $10.4 million for a one-year period for facilities support services appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar contracts for FAA facilities maintenance in other regions would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests that the government has a clear understanding of the costs involved, which can lead to better cost control compared to cost-plus contracts.

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.' This specific solicitation type suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources may have been excluded based on predefined criteria. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation implies a competitive process was utilized, which generally aids in price discovery and achieving fair market value.

Taxpayer Impact: This competitive approach is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple vendors to offer their best pricing and service terms, potentially leading to cost savings and higher quality service delivery.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will benefit from reliable facilities maintenance, ensuring operational efficiency. Essential services for maintaining critical infrastructure at FAA facilities. The primary geographic impact is within Oklahoma, supporting local FAA operations. Potential workforce implications include local job creation or retention for maintenance and support staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The specific criteria for 'exclusion of sources' in the full and open competition are not detailed, which could limit transparency.
Lack of information on the number of bidders makes it difficult to fully assess the intensity of competition.
The contract duration is for approximately one year, which may not incentivize long-term investment in service quality by the contractor.

Positive Signals

The use of 'Full and Open Competition' indicates an effort to ensure a competitive marketplace.
The firm-fixed-price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government.
The contract supports essential FAA operations, contributing to aviation safety and efficiency.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a significant sector within government contracting, encompassing a wide range of maintenance, repair, and operational services for federal buildings and infrastructure. The total federal spending in this sector can be in the billions annually. This contract represents a portion of the FAA's broader spending on maintaining its operational footprint, ensuring the smooth functioning of air traffic control and related facilities.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a primary set-aside consideration for this specific contract. Therefore, the direct impact on small businesses through this award is likely minimal. However, the prime contractor, KING & GEORGE, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, though this is not specified in the award details. Further analysis of subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the broader impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration's contracting officers and program managers. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability by linking payment to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance metrics and oversight reports are not publicly detailed here. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

FAA Facilities Operations and Maintenance
Department of Transportation Facilities Management
General Services Administration (GSA) Facilities Contracts
Department of Defense Base Operations Support

Risk Flags

Potential for reduced competition due to source exclusion.
Risk of contractor performance issues impacting essential FAA operations.
Uncertainty regarding the specific criteria for source exclusion.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $10.4 million to KING & GEORGE, LLC. 6973GH-24-F-00280 MMAC O&M CONTRACT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KING & GEORGE, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-01-16. End: 2025-12-31.

What is the track record of KING & GEORGE, LLC with federal contracts, particularly within the FAA or DOT?

A review of federal contract databases indicates that KING & GEORGE, LLC has received federal awards. To provide a comprehensive assessment of their track record, a detailed analysis of their past performance ratings, contract history (including types of services, values, and durations), and any past performance issues or commendations would be necessary. Specifically, examining their history with the FAA and DOT would reveal their experience in similar facilities support services and their ability to meet government requirements. Without this specific data, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability and expertise for this $10.4 million contract.

How does the $10.4 million value compare to similar FAA facilities maintenance contracts awarded in the past year?

Benchmarking this $10.4 million contract against similar FAA facilities maintenance contracts requires access to a broader dataset of recent awards. Factors such as geographic location, facility size and complexity, specific services included (e.g., HVAC, janitorial, groundskeeping), and contract duration significantly influence pricing. If this contract covers a large, complex facility or a comprehensive suite of services for a full year, $10.4 million might be within the expected range. Conversely, if it's for a smaller facility or a shorter duration, it could represent a higher per-unit cost. A detailed comparison would involve analyzing contract values relative to square footage maintained, service scope, and contract length for comparable FAA facilities.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract for facilities support services?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price contract for facilities support services lies in potential scope creep or unforeseen issues that could strain the contractor's ability to deliver within the fixed price. If KING & GEORGE, LLC encounters unexpected maintenance challenges or significant price increases in materials or labor not accounted for, their profit margins could be squeezed, potentially impacting service quality or leading to requests for contract modifications. Another risk is the contractor's capacity to manage all aspects of the service effectively for the entire duration. The government's risk is primarily related to ensuring the contractor has the capability and incentive to maintain high service standards throughout the contract term.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method in ensuring optimal value for taxpayers?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method aims to balance broad competition with specific requirements. By excluding certain sources, the agency might be targeting vendors with particular expertise or certifications deemed essential for the service. When executed properly, this method can still yield competitive pricing by allowing multiple qualified vendors to bid. However, the effectiveness in ensuring optimal value depends heavily on the justification for excluding sources and the number of remaining bidders. If the exclusion significantly limits the pool of capable contractors, it could reduce competitive pressure and potentially lead to higher prices than a truly unrestricted full and open competition. Transparency regarding the exclusion criteria is key to assessing its impact on value.

What are the implications of this contract being a Delivery Order (aw) rather than a base contract?

This contract being a Delivery Order (aw) signifies that it is likely a task order issued under an existing indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar multiple-award contract vehicle. This means the underlying contract vehicle itself likely underwent a competitive process. The $10.4 million represents the value allocated for this specific order, covering services from January 16, 2025, to December 31, 2025. The implications are that the broader terms, conditions, and potentially the competitive framework were established previously. This approach allows agencies flexibility in ordering services as needed, but the specific value and performance period are defined by this delivery order.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 320 HEMPHILL ST, FORT WORTH, TX, 76104

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,449,083

Exercised Options: $10,449,083

Current Obligation: $10,449,083

Actual Outlays: $10,418,196

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 6973GH23D00014

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline