DOE's $11.7M Facilities Support Services Contract Awarded to DIDLAKE INC Faces Scrutiny for Lack of Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $11,677,719 ($11.7M)
Contractor: Didlake Inc
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2003-08-15
End Date: 2008-10-31
Contract Duration: 1,904 days
Daily Burn Rate: $6.1K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Place of Performance
Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20585
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $11.7 million to DIDLAKE INC for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract's value of $11.7 million over its period of performance raises questions about cost-effectiveness given the limited competition. 2. The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status suggests potential risks related to price discovery and market-based value. 3. Performance context is limited due to the absence of competitive bidding, making it difficult to benchmark against industry standards. 4. The sector positioning within Facilities Support Services is notable, but the procurement method hinders assessment of its market competitiveness. 5. Risk indicators are elevated due to the sole-source nature, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers. 6. The duration of the contract (1904 days) for a non-competed award warrants closer examination of its necessity and terms.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this $11.7 million contract is challenging due to its non-competitive award. Without comparison to other bids or market rates for similar facilities support services, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing represents good value for money. The lack of a competitive process means there's no clear market signal to validate the cost. Further analysis would require understanding the specific services rendered and comparing them to industry benchmarks for similar government or private sector contracts.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded under a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' basis, indicating that a full and open competition was not conducted. This typically occurs when only one responsible source is available or when an exception to full and open competition applies. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no opportunity for price discovery through a competitive bidding process, potentially impacting the final negotiated price.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. This limits the government's ability to secure the best possible value for public funds.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the facilities management and support service providers, specifically DIDLAKE INC. The contract delivers essential facilities support services, likely encompassing maintenance, operations, and potentially security for Department of Energy sites. The geographic impact is concentrated in the District of Columbia, where the contract was awarded. Workforce implications include job creation and employment opportunities for individuals in the facilities support services sector within the DC metropolitan area.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competitive bidding may result in inflated costs for taxpayers.
- Limited transparency in the award process due to sole-source designation.
- Potential for vendor lock-in given the non-competitive nature of the award.
- Difficulty in assessing performance benchmarks without competitive context.
- The extended duration of the contract raises questions about its necessity and flexibility.
Positive Signals
- Ensures continuity of essential facilities support services for the Department of Energy.
- DIDLAKE INC is the awarded contractor, implying they met the agency's requirements for this specific service.
- The contract is a firm fixed-price type, which shifts some cost risk to the contractor.
- The contract has a defined period of performance, allowing for future re-evaluation and potential competition.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a broad category encompassing a range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure. This sector is critical for government agencies to ensure their facilities are functional, safe, and secure. The market for these services is often characterized by a mix of large, diversified companies and smaller, specialized firms. Government spending in this area is substantial, supporting numerous federal installations across the country. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale facilities management contracts awarded by various federal agencies.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that small business participation was not a stated factor in this award (ss: false, sb: false). As a sole-source contract, there were no subcontracting opportunities explicitly set aside for small businesses through a competitive process. This means the primary contract does not directly contribute to the small business contracting goals of the agency. However, the prime contractor, DIDLAKE INC, may still engage small businesses as subcontractors, but this information is not detailed in the award data.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be defined within the contract's terms and conditions, focusing on service delivery and performance standards. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, as the justification for not competing the contract is not publicly detailed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise concerning the contract's execution.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Facilities Management Contracts
- Department of Energy Operations and Maintenance
- Government Support Services
- Sole-Source Contract Awards
- Facilities Support Services Industry
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
- Potential for inflated pricing due to lack of competition.
- Limited transparency regarding the necessity of sole-source procurement.
- Extended contract duration without competitive re-evaluation.
Tags
facilities-support-services, department-of-energy, district-of-columbia, sole-source, firm-fixed-price, large-contract, facilities-management, government-contracting, non-competitive-award, support-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $11.7 million to DIDLAKE INC. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is DIDLAKE INC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $11.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-08-15. End: 2008-10-31.
What specific facilities support services are included under this contract?
The contract NAICS code 561210 designates 'Facilities Support Services.' This broad category typically includes a wide array of services essential for the operation and maintenance of buildings and grounds. Examples can range from routine maintenance (HVAC, plumbing, electrical), janitorial services, groundskeeping, pest control, waste management, security services, to more specialized functions like energy management and infrastructure upkeep. Without specific details within the award documentation, the precise scope of services for DIDLAKE INC's contract with the Department of Energy remains general but is understood to be comprehensive for the facilities they manage.
What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The data indicates the contract was awarded as 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which is a form of sole-source procurement. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 6 outlines the policies for contracting without full and open competition. Common justifications include that only one responsible source exists, or that the agency has a critical need that cannot be met by other means. Specific reasons could include unique capabilities of DIDLAKE INC, proprietary technology, or an urgent requirement where competition is not feasible. A formal justification document (e.g., J&A - Justification and Approval) would typically be required and maintained by the agency, though it is not provided in this data snippet.
How does the $11.7 million contract value compare to similar facilities support services contracts?
Direct comparison of the $11.7 million value is difficult without knowing the specific scope of services, duration, and geographic coverage. Facilities support contracts can vary significantly in price. However, for a contract spanning approximately 1904 days (over 5 years), $11.7 million suggests an average annual value of roughly $2.3 million. This figure is moderate for large-scale federal facilities support. To provide a robust benchmark, one would need to compare it against contracts for similar-sized facilities, complexity of services, and geographic locations, ideally those awarded competitively to establish a market-based price range.
What is DIDLAKE INC's track record with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Energy?
The provided data indicates DIDLAKE INC is the contractor for this specific Department of Energy (DOE) award. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their contract history across all federal agencies. This would involve looking at the number of contracts awarded, their values, performance ratings (if available), and any past performance issues or disputes. A comprehensive review would reveal their experience level, reliability, and capacity to handle federal contracts, especially within the facilities support services domain. Without access to a broader contract database or performance reports, a detailed assessment of DIDLAKE INC's specific track record beyond this single award is not possible from the given data.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude and duration?
Sole-source awards, especially for significant values like $11.7 million and durations exceeding five years, carry inherent risks. The primary risk is the lack of price competition, which can lead to the government paying more than necessary. There's also a reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve efficiency once the contract is secured. Furthermore, without competitive benchmarking, it's harder to ensure the services provided are of the highest quality and meet evolving needs. Agency oversight becomes even more critical to mitigate these risks, ensuring performance standards are met and costs are reasonable, even in the absence of market pressure.
How has federal spending in Facilities Support Services evolved, and where does this contract fit?
Federal spending in Facilities Support Services is a substantial and consistent category, reflecting the government's vast real estate portfolio. Spending trends are influenced by factors such as agency budgets, infrastructure modernization initiatives, and outsourcing strategies. This $11.7 million contract for the Department of Energy represents a portion of that overall spending. Its significance lies in its specific function for DOE operations in the District of Columbia. Analyzing historical spending patterns for similar DOE facilities or for the broader federal government's facilities support needs would provide context on whether this contract's value is typical, increasing, or decreasing relative to past investments in the sector.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Contractor Details
Address: 8641 BREEDEN AVE, MANASSAS, VA, 10
Business Categories: AbilityOne Program Participant, Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $12,835,125
Exercised Options: $12,835,125
Current Obligation: $11,677,719
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-08-15
Current End Date: 2008-10-31
Potential End Date: 2008-10-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2011-04-26
More Contracts from Didlake Inc
- Custodial Services AT the Pentagon (1ST, 3RD, 4TH, 5TH, BS, MZ) — $74.1M (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $44.2M (Department of Defense)
- Abilityone Custodial Services, Pentagon (floors 1, 5, Basement, Mezzanine, Pentagon Library and Conference Center, North Village/Compound, Pentagon Athletic Center) — $42.5M (Department of Defense)
- Custodial Services — $39.5M (Department of Defense)
- Forrestal Janitorial Contract — $27.0M (Department of Energy)
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)