DHS awards $23.7M for airport security screening, with 2 bids received

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,722,710 ($23.7M)

Contractor: Aviation Security Management LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2021-10-01

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY SCREENING SERVICES SIOUX FALLS REGIONAL AIRPORT (FSD) IN SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA

Place of Performance

Location: SIOUX FALLS, MINNEHAHA County, SOUTH DAKOTA, 57104

State: South Dakota Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $23.7 million to AVIATION SECURITY MANAGEMENT LLC for work described as: COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY SCREENING SERVICES SIOUX FALLS REGIONAL AIRPORT (FSD) IN SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the fixed-price award fee structure and duration. 2. Competition dynamics indicate limited but sufficient engagement with two bidders. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with potential for performance variations over the contract term. 4. Performance context is tied to essential airport security operations. 5. Sector positioning is within the critical aviation security services domain.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $23.7 million over five years suggests an average annual cost of approximately $4.7 million. Benchmarking against similar contracts for comprehensive security screening services at regional airports is challenging without more specific data on service scope and location. However, the fixed-price award fee structure aims to incentivize performance while managing costs. The base contract value of $12.99 million with potential for significant award fees indicates a performance-driven payment model.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with two bids received. While two bidders suggest some level of competition, it is on the lower end for a contract of this magnitude and duration. This limited competition may have had some impact on price discovery, potentially leading to a higher price than if more bidders had participated. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) likely established clear performance standards to ensure a competitive environment.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, two bidders mean that while there was competition, the potential for cost savings through robust bidding may have been constrained. The government secured a service provider, but the ultimate value could have been enhanced with a more competitive field.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are travelers and airport personnel at Sioux Falls Regional Airport (FSD), who receive enhanced security. Services delivered include comprehensive security screening, encompassing passenger and baggage checks. Geographic impact is localized to Sioux Falls, South Dakota, ensuring security at this specific federal facility. Workforce implications involve the creation or maintenance of security screening jobs, likely filled by local personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for performance drift over the five-year contract term.
Limited competition may have resulted in a less optimal price.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical security functions.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating broad market access.
Fixed-price award fee structure incentivizes contractor performance.
Contract duration provides stability for security operations.

Sector Analysis

The aviation security sector is a critical component of national infrastructure, heavily regulated by the TSA. This contract falls within the broader security services industry, which includes guard and patrol services (NAICS 561612). The market for airport security screening is characterized by a mix of large, established security firms and specialized providers. Spending in this sector is driven by federal mandates and the continuous need to protect transportation hubs.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the awardee is Aviation Security Management LLC, and there is no explicit mention of small business set-asides or subcontracting goals. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, and the presence of only two bidders suggests that larger, more established firms may have been the primary participants. This could limit opportunities for small businesses to engage in subcontracting for specialized security services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Accountability measures are embedded within the fixed-price award fee structure, which ties a portion of the payment to performance metrics. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific performance reports may not be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Airport Security Services
Guard and Patrol Services
Federal Airport Security Contracts
Transportation Security Administration Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition (2 bidders)
Potential for performance degradation over long contract term

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $23.7 million to AVIATION SECURITY MANAGEMENT LLC. COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY SCREENING SERVICES SIOUX FALLS REGIONAL AIRPORT (FSD) IN SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AVIATION SECURITY MANAGEMENT LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-10-01. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the track record of Aviation Security Management LLC with federal contracts, particularly with the TSA?

A review of federal procurement data indicates that Aviation Security Management LLC has a history of securing contracts related to security services. While specific details on past performance with the TSA for this exact type of comprehensive screening are not immediately available in the provided data, the company's award suggests it meets the necessary qualifications and experience requirements. Further investigation into their contract history, including any past performance evaluations or awards from the TSA or other federal agencies, would provide a more complete picture of their track record. This includes examining the types of services previously rendered, contract values, and any reported issues or successes.

How does the awarded price compare to similar security screening contracts at other regional airports?

Direct comparison of the $23.7 million total contract value for Sioux Falls Regional Airport (FSD) to similar contracts at other regional airports is challenging without a standardized dataset that accounts for variations in airport size, passenger volume, screening complexity, and service scope. The average annual value of approximately $4.7 million needs to be contextualized by the specific operational demands of FSD. Benchmarking would ideally involve analyzing contracts with comparable passenger throughput and security requirements. The fixed-price award fee structure also complicates direct price-to-price comparisons, as the final amount paid is contingent on performance.

What are the primary risks associated with a five-year contract for airport security screening?

The primary risks associated with a five-year contract for airport security screening include potential performance degradation over time as the contractor may become complacent, changes in security threats requiring updated screening protocols that may not be adequately addressed in the original contract, and potential cost overruns if the fixed-price model does not adequately account for inflation or unforeseen operational challenges. There's also a risk of contractor personnel turnover, impacting the consistency and quality of screening. Furthermore, reliance on a single provider for such a critical function presents a systemic risk if the contractor fails to meet obligations or faces financial instability.

How effective is the fixed-price award fee structure in ensuring optimal performance and value for money?

The fixed-price award fee (FPAF) structure is designed to balance cost control with performance incentives. The 'fixed-price' component provides a baseline cost certainty for the government, while the 'award fee' portion allows for additional payment based on the contractor's achievement of specific performance objectives. This structure aims to motivate the contractor to exceed minimum requirements and deliver high-quality services. Its effectiveness hinges on the clarity and measurability of the performance criteria and the fairness of the award fee determination process. If well-defined, it can drive better value than a simple fixed-price contract, but poorly defined criteria can lead to disputes or ineffective incentives.

What is the historical spending trend for airport security screening services by the TSA?

Historical spending trends for airport security screening services by the TSA are generally characterized by consistent and significant investment, driven by federal mandates and the ongoing need for robust security measures. While specific figures for 'comprehensive security screening services' at regional airports are not detailed here, the TSA's overall budget reflects substantial allocations towards personnel, technology, and services required for screening operations nationwide. Spending typically increases with inflation, evolving security threats, and expansions in air travel. Contracts are often awarded for multi-year periods to ensure continuity and leverage economies of scale, indicating a stable, long-term commitment to these services.

What are the implications of having only two bidders for this contract on future competition for similar services?

Having only two bidders for this contract could signal a market with limited players capable of undertaking such comprehensive security screening services, or it might indicate specific barriers to entry for this particular solicitation. This could potentially discourage future competition if potential bidders perceive the market as concentrated or if the solicitation requirements were particularly stringent. For taxpayers, it means less pressure on pricing than a more robustly competed contract. The TSA may need to analyze why more bidders did not participate to ensure future solicitations are structured to attract a wider range of qualified offerors, thereby enhancing competition and potentially lowering costs.

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

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE (M)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 17885 FRALEY BLVD SUITE 201, DUMFRIES, VA, 22026

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,746,008

Exercised Options: $23,722,710

Current Obligation: $23,722,710

Actual Outlays: $15,167,710

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSTS0516DSPP902

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline