DoD's $44.3M Army contract for focused sustainment services awarded to URS Federal Services Inc. in 2007

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $44,272,649 ($44.3M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-10-26

End Date: 2008-10-09

Contract Duration: 349 days

Daily Burn Rate: $126.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: FOCUSED SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT

Place of Performance

Location: GAITHERSBURG, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20878

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $44.3 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC. for work described as: FOCUSED SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in sustainment operations. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The Time and Materials pricing structure may pose cost control challenges. 4. Contract duration of approximately one year indicates a short-term need. 5. Performance was managed by the Department of the Army, a key defense agency. 6. The contract was awarded in Maryland, a state with a strong federal contracting presence.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $44.3 million for a duration of approximately one year suggests a substantial per-annum cost. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, it's difficult to benchmark value against similar sustainment contracts. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing model, while flexible, can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed, potentially impacting overall value for money. Further analysis would require details on the services rendered and their criticality.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 6 bidders (no) suggests a competitive environment, which typically benefits price discovery and can lead to more favorable pricing for the government. The level of competition is a positive sign for achieving value.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, receiving critical sustainment services. Services delivered likely supported military readiness and operational capabilities. Geographic impact is centered around the contract's performance location in Maryland. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for personnel skilled in sustainment and logistics.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials pricing can lead to unpredictable costs if not managed stringently.
The relatively short duration might indicate a need for more long-term sustainment solutions.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it hard to assess efficiency and effectiveness.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, ensuring a competitive bidding process.
Multiple bidders participated, indicating a healthy level of market interest and competition.
The contract was awarded to a known entity (URS Federal Services Inc.), suggesting a degree of contractor reliability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader defense sector, specifically focusing on sustainment services. Sustainment is a critical component of military operations, encompassing maintenance, logistics, and support for equipment and infrastructure. The market for defense sustainment is substantial, with numerous contractors vying for these essential services. Benchmarking this contract's value would require comparison to other similar sustainment contracts awarded by the DoD or other branches of the military, considering the specific nature of the services provided.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (sb: false). There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the extent to which small businesses may have participated or benefited from this award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would typically involve contract performance reviews, financial audits, and adherence to the terms and conditions of the Time and Materials contract. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance data may be less accessible to the public.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Logistics Support Contracts
Army Maintenance and Repair Services
Federal Sustainment Services
Time and Materials Defense Contracts

Risk Flags

Time and Materials pricing structure
Short contract duration
Lack of detailed service description

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $44.3 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC.. FOCUSED SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $44.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-10-26. End: 2008-10-09.

What specific sustainment services were provided under this contract?

The provided data identifies this as a 'FOCUSED SUSTAINMENT CONTRACT' awarded to URS Federal Services Inc. by the Department of the Army. However, the specific nature of the 'focused sustainment' services is not detailed. Typically, sustainment services in a defense context can encompass a wide range of activities, including but not limited to, maintenance and repair of equipment (vehicles, aircraft, weapons systems), logistical support, supply chain management, facility maintenance, and technical support. Without further documentation or a detailed contract statement of work, the precise services rendered remain unspecified. This lack of specificity makes it challenging to fully assess the contract's purpose and effectiveness.

How does the $44.3 million contract value compare to similar sustainment contracts for the Army?

Comparing the $44.3 million value requires context regarding the contract's duration and scope. Awarded in late 2007 with an end date in October 2008, this represents an annualized value of approximately $44.3 million, suggesting a significant but potentially short-term sustainment requirement. Benchmarking against other Army sustainment contracts would necessitate examining awards of similar duration and service type. For instance, longer-term, multi-year sustainment contracts for major weapon systems often run into hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. Conversely, smaller, more specialized sustainment efforts might be in the single-digit millions. This contract appears to be of moderate size for a focused, potentially time-bound sustainment effort within the Army's vast operational needs.

What are the potential risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract of this magnitude?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts, like this $44.3 million award, carry inherent risks, primarily concerning cost control. The government pays for the actual labor hours and materials used, plus a fixed fee or நிர்ணயிக்கப்பட்ட rate. The primary risk is that without stringent oversight and well-defined ceilings, costs can escalate beyond initial estimates. Contractor efficiency is not directly incentivized, as more hours worked can mean more revenue. For this contract, potential risks include scope creep, inefficient labor utilization, and inflated material costs. Effective management by the Army, including detailed monitoring of hours, justification of materials, and potentially establishing cost ceilings, would be crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure value for money.

What does the fact that 6 bidders competed indicate about the market for these services?

The participation of 6 bidders in this full and open competition for focused sustainment services suggests a reasonably competitive market for such offerings within the defense sector. A higher number of bidders generally indicates that multiple companies possess the capability and interest to perform the required work. This level of competition is beneficial for the government as it typically drives down prices, encourages innovation, and increases the likelihood of selecting a contractor that offers the best value. It implies that the barriers to entry for providing these specific sustainment services are not excessively high, and that URS Federal Services Inc. was selected from a pool of qualified and competitive entities.

How might the short duration (approx. 1 year) impact the effectiveness of the sustainment services?

A contract duration of approximately one year, as indicated for this $44.3 million award, can have mixed impacts on the effectiveness of sustainment services. On one hand, it allows the Army to address a specific, potentially short-term need or to test a particular service provider before committing to a longer-term arrangement. This flexibility can be advantageous. However, for sustainment activities that require deep institutional knowledge, long lead times for parts or specialized training, or the development of robust processes, a one-year period might be insufficient to achieve optimal effectiveness and efficiency. It could lead to a focus on immediate tasks rather than long-term asset health, and potentially higher transition costs if a new contract is required shortly thereafter.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM Global II, LLC (UEI: 043271568)

Address: 175 ADMIRAL COCHRANE DR, ANNAPOLIS, MD, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $44,272,649

Exercised Options: $44,272,649

Current Obligation: $44,272,649

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DAAE0798DT060

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline