DOE's $90M Facilities Support Services contract to Goldbelt Eagle shows fair value, but limited competition raises concerns
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $90,427,894 ($90.4M)
Contractor: Goldbelt Eagle, L.L.C.
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2009-11-15
End Date: 2015-01-31
Contract Duration: 1,903 days
Daily Burn Rate: $47.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) MASTER IDIQ
Place of Performance
Location: MORGANTOWN, MONONGALIA County, WEST VIRGINIA, 26505
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $90.4 million to GOLDBELT EAGLE, L.L.C. for work described as: SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) MASTER IDIQ Key points: 1. The contract's total value of $90.4M over its period of performance suggests a moderate scale for facilities support services. 2. Competition was limited, raising questions about optimal price discovery and potential for higher costs to taxpayers. 3. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type introduces performance incentives but can also lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. 4. The contract's duration of 1903 days (approx. 5.2 years) indicates a long-term need for these services. 5. The primary geographic focus in West Virginia suggests a localized operational requirement. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates this was not specifically targeted to boost small business participation.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this $90.4M contract is challenging without specific details on the scope of 'Facilities Support Services' provided by Goldbelt Eagle. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, while allowing for performance incentives, can sometimes lead to higher final costs compared to fixed-price contracts if cost controls are not rigorously enforced. Comparing this to similar large-scale facilities support contracts across federal agencies would be necessary for a more precise value assessment. The award amount itself appears reasonable for a multi-year, comprehensive support contract.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which implies that while the initial solicitation was open, certain sources were excluded, leading to a limited pool of bidders. The exact number of bidders is not specified, but this type of competition generally results in fewer offers than full and open competition. This limited competition may have reduced the pressure on pricing and potentially led to a higher contract value than if a broader range of qualified contractors had participated.
Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can mean taxpayers may not have benefited from the most competitive pricing available in the market. This could translate to higher overall spending for the services rendered compared to a scenario with more robust bidding.
Public Impact
The Department of Energy benefits from the continuity of essential site operations and maintenance services. Services delivered likely include facility management, maintenance, security, and potentially other operational support functions at DOE sites. The primary geographic impact is concentrated in West Virginia, supporting federal operations within that state. The contract supports a workforce employed by Goldbelt Eagle, contributing to local employment in the region.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited competition may have resulted in suboptimal pricing for taxpayers.
- The CPAF contract type requires diligent oversight to prevent cost creep.
- The exclusion of sources in the competition process warrants further investigation into its justification.
Positive Signals
- The contract was awarded to a specific entity, indicating a clear provider for essential services.
- The long duration suggests a stable and reliable service provision for the Department of Energy.
- The award was made under a competitive process, even if limited, suggesting some level of vetting.
Sector Analysis
Facilities Support Services fall under the broader Facilities Support Services industry, which includes a wide range of services such as building operations, maintenance, repair, and management. This sector is characterized by numerous providers, from large integrated facility management companies to specialized service firms. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services, often requiring comprehensive support for its vast real estate portfolio. Spending benchmarks for similar large-scale federal facilities support contracts can vary widely based on the scope, location, and specific services required, but contracts in the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars are common for major installations.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the competition was not structured to prioritize or guarantee a portion of the work for small businesses. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications mandated by a small business set-aside. The impact on the small business ecosystem is neutral, as this contract did not actively seek to engage them through set-aside provisions.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure necessitates robust performance monitoring and evaluation to ensure award fees are justified and that costs remain controlled. Transparency regarding performance metrics and award fee determinations would be key accountability measures. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.
Related Government Programs
- Facilities Operations and Maintenance
- Government Facilities Management
- Site Support Services
- Department of Energy Operations
Risk Flags
- Limited Competition
- Cost Plus Award Fee Structure
- Exclusion of Sources in Competition
Tags
facilities-support-services, department-of-energy, west-virginia, definitive-contract, master-idiq, cost-plus-award-fee, limited-competition, facilities-operations, government-contracting, federal-spending
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $90.4 million to GOLDBELT EAGLE, L.L.C.. SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) MASTER IDIQ
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GOLDBELT EAGLE, L.L.C..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $90.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-11-15. End: 2015-01-31.
What specific services were included under the 'SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) MASTER IDIQ' for Goldbelt Eagle?
The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 561210 (Facilities Support Services) and was awarded as a Definitive Contract under a Master IDIQ. While the exact scope isn't detailed, typical services for facilities support at a federal level include operations and maintenance of buildings and grounds, custodial services, security, waste management, energy management, space management, and potentially specialized support for research or operational facilities. Given the Department of Energy context, these services likely supported the safe and efficient functioning of specific DOE sites in West Virginia.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure impact the value for money in this contract?
The CPAF structure aims to incentivize contractor performance by allowing for award fees based on achieving specific performance objectives. This can lead to better service quality and efficiency compared to a simple cost-plus contract. However, it also introduces a risk of cost escalation if the performance objectives are not clearly defined, measurable, or if the baseline costs are not well-managed. For value for money, it's crucial that the award fee criteria are stringent and directly tied to measurable outcomes that benefit the government, ensuring that higher costs are justified by demonstrably superior performance. Without detailed performance reports, it's difficult to definitively assess if the award fees paid were fully justified.
What are the implications of 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' for pricing and competition?
This contracting method suggests that while the initial solicitation was intended to be open, certain potential bidders were excluded from the final competition phase. The reasons for exclusion are not provided but could stem from pre-qualification requirements, specific capabilities, or other factors. This limitation inherently reduces the number of competing entities, which typically leads to less aggressive pricing than a truly 'full and open' competition with maximum bidder participation. Taxpayers may therefore have paid a premium due to the restricted market access for potential offerors.
What is the historical spending pattern for Facilities Support Services at the Department of Energy, particularly in West Virginia?
The provided data only covers this specific $90.4M contract awarded to Goldbelt Eagle from 2009 to 2015. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to analyze broader federal procurement databases (like USASpending.gov) for similar facilities support contracts awarded by the DOE, both before and after this period, and specifically within West Virginia. This would involve identifying contracts with similar NAICS codes (561210) and service descriptions to establish trends in contract values, durations, and awardees over time.
What is Goldbelt Eagle's track record with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Energy?
The data shows Goldbelt Eagle, L.L.C. was awarded this $90.4M contract by the Department of Energy. To assess their track record, further investigation into their contract history would be required. This would involve searching procurement databases for other contracts awarded to Goldbelt Eagle across various federal agencies, noting their performance ratings, any past performance issues or awards, and their experience with similar types of services (facilities support). Understanding their broader federal contracting portfolio provides context for their capabilities and reliability.
Are there any specific risks associated with the geographic concentration in West Virginia for these facilities support services?
Geographic concentration in West Virginia for facilities support services could present several risks. Firstly, it might limit the pool of readily available local subcontractors or specialized labor, potentially increasing costs or lead times for certain tasks. Secondly, reliance on a single geographic area could make the contract more vulnerable to localized economic downturns, natural disasters, or regulatory changes specific to West Virginia. Lastly, if the DOE sites in West Virginia have unique or highly specialized operational needs, ensuring that the contractor possesses and maintains the necessary expertise for that specific environment is critical.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Goldbelt, Incorporated (UEI: 096763800)
Address: 3606 COLLINS FERRY RD STE 101, MORGANTOWN, WV, 26505
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $94,000,000
Exercised Options: $94,000,000
Current Obligation: $90,427,894
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-11-15
Current End Date: 2015-01-31
Potential End Date: 2015-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-03-10
More Contracts from Goldbelt Eagle, L.L.C.
- Fixed Price Construction — $11.7M (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)