DHS awards $1.56M for environmental services, with 3 bidders competing for a firm-fixed-price contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $1,558,192 ($1.6M)

Contractor: Bowhead Mission Solutions, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2021-09-10

End Date: 2026-09-19

Contract Duration: 1,835 days

Daily Burn Rate: $849/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR OASIS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS FOR CEU JUNEAU

Place of Performance

Location: JUNEAU, JUNEAU County, ALASKA, 99802

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $1.6 million to BOWHEAD MISSION SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR OASIS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS FOR CEU JUNEAU Key points: 1. The contract value of $1.56 million appears reasonable for specialized environmental services. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a healthy market for these services. 3. The contract duration of 1835 days (approx. 5 years) indicates a long-term need. 4. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts risk to the contractor, potentially stabilizing costs. 5. The award to Bowhead Mission Solutions, LLC, requires assessment of their past performance. 6. The geographic focus on Alaska (AK) suggests specialized regional environmental expertise is needed.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $1.56 million for specialized environmental services over approximately five years is within a reasonable range. Benchmarking against similar contracts for environmental consulting and engineering services for federal agencies, particularly those with a focus on remote or specialized regions like Alaska, would provide further context. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally favorable for cost control when requirements are well-defined, as it places the cost risk on the contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while initial solicitations may have had some exclusions, the final award was made through a broad competitive process. With three bidders participating, the level of competition is moderate. This suggests that while there is interest in the contract, the market may not be saturated, potentially influencing pricing dynamics.

Taxpayer Impact: A moderate level of competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing. However, with only three bidders, there is a possibility that prices could be higher than in a scenario with more robust competition.

Public Impact

The U.S. Coast Guard (part of DHS) benefits from specialized environmental expertise. Services likely include environmental assessments, compliance monitoring, and remediation support. The geographic impact is primarily focused on Alaska, addressing unique environmental challenges. The contract supports specialized technical roles within the environmental services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The specific environmental challenges in Alaska may require specialized and potentially costly solutions.
The long contract duration could lead to scope creep if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical environmental services over several years warrants close performance monitoring.

Positive Signals

The use of full and open competition suggests a robust market for these services.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract addresses a clear need for environmental services within the U.S. Coast Guard's operations in Alaska.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a broad category encompassing professional services related to the design, development, and application of engineering principles. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services, particularly for infrastructure projects, environmental management, and defense-related activities. Spending in this sector is often driven by regulatory requirements, infrastructure modernization, and national security needs. The $1.56 million award is a moderate-sized contract within this sector, likely supporting a specific operational or compliance requirement.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. However, the prime contractor, Bowhead Mission Solutions, LLC, may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall business strategy, which would need to be assessed through their subcontracting plan if one exists.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the U.S. Coast Guard contracting office and program managers within the Department of Homeland Security. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement data systems where contract awards are reported. The Inspector General for DHS would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

OASIS Small Business (SB) and Unrestricted (UR) Contracts
Environmental Consulting Services
Engineering Services for Federal Agencies
Department of Homeland Security Contracts
U.S. Coast Guard Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen environmental conditions arise in Alaska.
Risk of contractor performance degradation over the long contract duration.
Need for robust government oversight to ensure quality and compliance.
Market concentration risk if only a few firms can provide specialized Alaskan environmental services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $1.6 million to BOWHEAD MISSION SOLUTIONS, LLC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR OASIS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS FOR CEU JUNEAU

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOWHEAD MISSION SOLUTIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Coast Guard).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $1.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-09-10. End: 2026-09-19.

What is the track record of Bowhead Mission Solutions, LLC in performing similar environmental services contracts for the federal government?

Assessing the track record of Bowhead Mission Solutions, LLC is crucial for understanding their capability to deliver on this $1.56 million environmental services contract. A review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving environmental assessments, compliance, or remediation in challenging environments like Alaska, would be necessary. This includes examining past performance evaluations, any instances of contract disputes or terminations, and their history of meeting cost, schedule, and performance requirements. Positive indicators would include successful completion of similar projects, favorable client feedback, and a history of on-time, within-budget delivery. Conversely, a history of performance issues or unresolved claims could indicate a higher risk for this current contract.

How does the awarded price of $1.56 million compare to market rates for similar environmental services in Alaska?

To benchmark the $1.56 million award, a detailed analysis of market rates for comparable environmental services in Alaska is required. This would involve researching the typical costs for environmental impact assessments, regulatory compliance support, and potentially hazardous material management specific to the Alaskan environment, considering its unique logistical challenges and ecological sensitivities. Factors such as the specific scope of work, required expertise (e.g., permafrost, arctic wildlife), and the duration of services (approximately 5 years) need to be factored in. Comparing the estimated labor rates, overhead, and profit margins to industry benchmarks and rates charged by other firms performing similar work in the region would help determine if the awarded price represents good value for money. Without specific task orders and detailed cost breakdowns, a precise comparison is difficult, but the overall contract value provides a starting point for such an analysis.

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

The primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract revolve around the contractor's ability to accurately estimate and manage costs over the approximately five-year period, especially given the potential for unforeseen environmental conditions in Alaska. While FFP shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor, a poorly estimated bid could lead to the contractor cutting corners on quality or attempting to claim unforeseen conditions as contract changes, potentially leading to disputes. Another risk is the contractor's capacity to maintain performance standards throughout the contract's duration, particularly if the initial pricing was aggressive. Ensuring adequate government oversight to monitor performance and compliance, and to manage any necessary contract modifications judiciously, is critical to mitigating these risks and ensuring the government receives the intended value.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method in ensuring competitive pricing for specialized services?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method aims to balance the need for broad competition with specific requirements that might initially limit the pool of eligible contractors. In this case, with three bidders, the method appears to have generated some level of competition. However, the effectiveness in ensuring optimal competitive pricing depends heavily on the nature of the 'exclusions' and the overall market size for these specialized environmental services in Alaska. If the exclusions were narrowly defined, limiting the number of potential bidders, the competition might be less robust than true full and open competition. Conversely, if the exclusions were justified and the remaining pool still attracted multiple capable bidders, it could lead to competitive pricing. The fact that three bidders participated suggests a moderately effective outcome, but further analysis of the specific exclusions and the bidders' proposals would be needed for a definitive assessment of pricing effectiveness.

What is the historical spending pattern for environmental services by the U.S. Coast Guard in Alaska?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for environmental services by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) in Alaska is essential for contextualizing the $1.56 million award. This involves examining previous contracts awarded by the USCG for similar services in the region over the past 5-10 years. Key metrics to investigate include the total annual spending on environmental services, the average contract value, the number of contracts awarded, and the types of services procured. Understanding whether this $1.56 million contract represents an increase, decrease, or consistent level of spending compared to historical averages can indicate trends in USCG's environmental support needs in Alaska. It also helps in identifying dominant contractors and assessing the stability of the market for these services within the region.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT › NATURAL RESOURCES - OTHER SVCS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 6564 LOISDALE CT STE 900, SPRINGFIELD, VA, 22150

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $1,558,192

Exercised Options: $1,558,192

Current Obligation: $1,558,192

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADS109

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline