DOE Awards $194M Facilities Support Contract to Kaiser Hill LLC Under Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $193,958,593 ($194.0M)

Contractor: Kaiser Hill LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 1999-10-15

End Date: 2000-06-30

Contract Duration: 259 days

Daily Burn Rate: $748.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: GREENWOOD VILLAGE, ARAPAHOE County, COLORADO, 80111

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $194.0 million to KAISER HILL LLC for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract value of $194 million for facilities support services is substantial. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Incentive) carries inherent risk for cost overruns. 4. The sector is facilities support services, a common area for government spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $194 million is significant for facilities support services. Benchmarking against similar contracts is difficult without more specific service details, but the scale suggests a major operational requirement.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to compete. This method generally promotes price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is generally positive for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best value through market forces.

Public Impact

Taxpayers benefit from a competitive bidding process for essential government services. The large contract value highlights significant government investment in facilities management. The specific services provided under this contract will impact various government operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

Facilities support services are crucial for the operational efficiency of government agencies. Spending in this sector can vary widely based on the size and scope of agency facilities, with benchmarks often tied to square footage and service complexity.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved as subcontractors or prime contractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight would focus on ensuring Kaiser Hill LLC meets performance standards and manages costs effectively under the CPIF structure, particularly given the short contract duration.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

facilities-support-services, department-of-energy, co, dca, 100m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $194.0 million to KAISER HILL LLC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KAISER HILL LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $194.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-10-15. End: 2000-06-30.

What specific facilities support services were included in this $194 million contract, and how do they align with the Department of Energy's operational needs?

The contract likely encompassed a range of services such as maintenance, repair, custodial, security, and potentially specialized technical support for Department of Energy facilities. The alignment would depend on the specific sites and infrastructure managed by the agency, ensuring operational continuity and safety.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) and incentive structures within the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) arrangement, and how were they designed to manage risk and ensure value?

CPIF contracts typically set target costs and target profits, with adjustments based on performance against pre-defined metrics. KPIs might include response times, quality of service, and cost savings. The incentive structure would aim to reward the contractor for exceeding targets while sharing the risk of cost overruns.

How did the full and open competition process ensure that Kaiser Hill LLC's bid represented the best value for the government, considering the CPIF structure?

Full and open competition allowed multiple qualified vendors to submit proposals, fostering a competitive environment. The evaluation process would have assessed not only price but also technical approach, past performance, and the reasonableness of the proposed cost and fee structure, ensuring the selected offer provided the best overall value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesFacilities Support ServicesFacilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITYOPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE (V)

Contractor Details

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $-105,488

Exercised Options: $-10,757,747

Current Obligation: $193,958,593

Timeline

Start Date: 1999-10-15

Current End Date: 2000-06-30

Potential End Date: 2000-06-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2012-07-26

Other Department of Energy Contracts

View all Department of Energy contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending