Homeland Security awards $4.5M for Maryland PSO services to Bradley Technologies Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,467,157 ($4.5M)

Contractor: Bradley Technologies Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2025-10-01

End Date: 2026-05-31

Contract Duration: 242 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PROTECTIVE SECURITY OFFICER (PSO) SERVICES IN MARYLAND

Place of Performance

Location: ROCKVILLE, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20852

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $4.5 million to BRADLEY TECHNOLOGIES INC for work described as: PROTECTIVE SECURITY OFFICER (PSO) SERVICES IN MARYLAND Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in protective security services for the region. 2. The procurement method suggests a competitive process, potentially leading to favorable pricing. 3. Fixed-price contract type helps mitigate cost overrun risks for the government. 4. Service delivery is concentrated in Maryland, indicating a specific geographic focus. 5. The contract duration of 242 days suggests a short-term or interim need for these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $4.5 million for 242 days of service is within a reasonable range for protective security services. Benchmarking against similar contracts for PSO services in Maryland or adjacent regions would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure is generally favorable for cost control. Without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value assessment is challenging, but the initial indicators suggest a fair price for the expected services.

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,' which indicates a competitive process was intended, though specific details on the exclusion of sources are not provided. This method typically involves broad solicitation to encourage multiple bidders. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' nature suggests a robust competition was sought, which generally aids in price discovery and ensures a wider pool of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down prices through market forces. This approach aims to secure the best value for the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies within Maryland requiring protective security services. The services delivered include security guard and patrol functions to ensure safety and security. The geographic impact is focused on the state of Maryland. The contract supports jobs within the security services industry, particularly in Maryland.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the services.
The exclusion of sources, even within a full and open competition, warrants further investigation into potential limitations on competition.
The short contract duration may indicate an interim solution, raising questions about long-term security planning.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type helps control costs and provides budget certainty.
Full and open competition, even with exclusions, suggests an effort to leverage market competition.
The contractor, Bradley Technologies Inc., is awarded a contract, indicating they met the government's requirements.

Sector Analysis

The security services sector is a significant part of the federal contracting landscape, with substantial spending on guards and patrol services (NAICS 561612). This contract fits within that broader category, addressing the need for physical security. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar PSO contracts in the region would be useful for a deeper analysis. The market is generally competitive, with numerous providers capable of offering these services.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a specific set-aside criterion (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the best offer through full and open competition. There is no explicit information on subcontracting requirements for small businesses within this award. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely neutral to minimal unless Bradley Technologies Inc. actively engages small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Homeland Security's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, which ties payment to service delivery. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports are often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Protective Security Officer Services
Security Guard Contracts
Department of Homeland Security Contracts
Federal Protective Service Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion
Potential for corner-cutting on quality due to FFP structure without strong oversight
Short contract duration may indicate lack of long-term planning

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $4.5 million to BRADLEY TECHNOLOGIES INC. PROTECTIVE SECURITY OFFICER (PSO) SERVICES IN MARYLAND

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BRADLEY TECHNOLOGIES INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Office of Procurement Operations).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-10-01. End: 2026-05-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for Protective Security Officer (PSO) services by the Department of Homeland Security in Maryland?

Analyzing historical spending for PSO services by DHS in Maryland requires access to comprehensive federal procurement data. While this specific contract is for approximately $4.5 million over 242 days, understanding the broader trend involves looking at previous years' obligations for similar services within the state. Factors such as changes in security requirements, agency needs, and the number of active contracts can influence spending. For instance, if there has been a consistent need for PSO services, spending might be relatively stable, or it could fluctuate based on specific events or increased threat levels. A detailed analysis would involve aggregating contract data for NAICS code 561612 within Maryland awarded by DHS, comparing annual spending, and identifying any significant deviations or patterns over the last 5-10 fiscal years. This context helps determine if the current award is an anomaly or part of an established spending trajectory.

How does the per-unit cost of this contract compare to similar PSO contracts awarded by DHS in other states?

Benchmarking the per-unit cost of this contract requires breaking down the total award value by the estimated service hours or equivalent units. Given the total award of $4,567,156.56 for a 242-day period, and assuming a standard 8-hour workday for security personnel, this translates to roughly $23,500 per day. Comparing this to similar contracts awarded by DHS in other states necessitates identifying contracts with comparable scope, service levels, and geographic considerations. Factors like local labor costs, prevailing wage rates, and specific security requirements (e.g., armed vs. unarmed officers, specialized equipment) significantly influence per-unit costs. If this contract's daily rate is substantially higher or lower than comparable contracts, it could indicate either exceptional value or potential issues with pricing. A thorough comparison would involve normalizing costs based on these variables to ensure a fair assessment.

What are the specific risks associated with a 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement method?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method, while aiming for competition, introduces specific risks. The 'exclusion of sources' implies that certain potential offerors were intentionally not considered, which could stem from various reasons, such as prior performance issues, specific technical requirements, or even perceived conflicts of interest. The primary risk is that this exclusion might inadvertently limit the pool of qualified bidders, potentially leading to less competitive pricing than true full and open competition. It also raises questions about the justification for the exclusion and whether it was truly necessary and documented appropriately. Transparency can be a concern if the reasons for exclusion are not clearly communicated or justified. This method requires careful oversight to ensure that the exclusion was fair, legal, and ultimately served the government's best interest without unduly restricting competition.

What is Bradley Technologies Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly for security services?

Assessing Bradley Technologies Inc.'s track record involves reviewing their past performance on federal contracts, especially those related to security services (NAICS 561612). Information on contract awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any past disputes or terminations would be crucial. A history of successful contract completions, positive performance reviews, and adherence to delivery schedules and quality standards would indicate reliability. Conversely, a record of poor performance, contract disputes, or terminations could signal higher risk for this current award. Examining their experience with similar contract values and scopes is also important. Without specific data on their past performance, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability for this $4.5 million contract.

What are the potential implications of the firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type on service quality and contractor performance?

A Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) contract type generally incentivizes the contractor to control costs and perform efficiently to maximize profit. For service quality, the FFP structure means the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can sometimes lead to pressure to cut corners if not properly managed and overseen. However, it also provides budget certainty for the government. The effectiveness of FFP in maintaining quality hinges on robust performance standards and diligent oversight by the government. If the contract clearly defines deliverables and performance metrics, and the government actively monitors adherence, quality should be maintained. If oversight is weak or performance standards are vague, the contractor might prioritize cost savings over optimal service quality. For this PSO contract, clear metrics on response times, officer conduct, and site coverage are essential to ensure quality under the FFP structure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Guards and Patrol Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

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: 1700 ROCKVILLE PIKE, ROCKVILLE, MD, 20852

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, 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, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,467,157

Exercised Options: $4,467,157

Current Obligation: $4,467,157

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 70RFP223DEC000007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline