Commerce Department's $52.9M Patent Library Contract Awarded to AS AND D, LLC for Facilities Support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $52,883,438 ($52.9M)

Contractor: AS and D, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Commerce

Start Date: 2017-04-14

End Date: 2020-08-15

Contract Duration: 1,219 days

Daily Burn Rate: $43.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: TRAINING AND PATENT LIBRARIES SUPPORT; IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: BELTSVILLE, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20705

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Commerce obligated $52.9 million to AS AND D, LLC for work described as: TRAINING AND PATENT LIBRARIES SUPPORT; IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in maintaining critical patent and training resources. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding process, which could lead to favorable pricing. 3. The contract duration of approximately 3.4 years warrants attention to ongoing performance and cost management. 4. The use of Time and Materials pricing may introduce cost variability if not closely monitored. 5. The award falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a common area for government contracting. 6. The contract's performance period spans a period of significant technological advancement, potentially impacting service needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $52.9 million over approximately 3.4 years appears reasonable for comprehensive facilities support services for patent and training libraries. Benchmarking against similar contracts for large-scale facility management and information resource maintenance would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, necessitates diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns and ensure fair pricing relative to the work performed. Without specific per-unit cost data, a direct comparison is challenging, but the overall award size suggests a substantial scope of work.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating that while full and open competition was intended, certain sources were excluded. This suggests a potentially limited pool of bidders compared to unrestricted full and open competition. The specific reasons for excluding sources would be critical to understanding the true level of competition. A limited competition may result in less aggressive pricing than a broader competition, though it could also be justified by specific technical requirements or past performance.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have faced slightly higher costs due to the restricted bidding pool. However, if the exclusions were based on necessary qualifications, the resulting award could still represent good value.

Public Impact

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) benefits from the continued maintenance and accessibility of its patent and training libraries. This contract ensures the physical and digital infrastructure supporting intellectual property resources remains operational. The services delivered are crucial for inventors, researchers, businesses, and the public seeking patent information. The contract's primary geographic impact is within Maryland, where the facilities are likely located. The contract supports jobs within the facilities management and library support sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost creep due to Time and Materials pricing structure if not rigorously managed.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition could limit competitive pressure and potentially increase costs.
Ensuring consistent service quality across the entire contract duration requires robust performance monitoring.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical library facilities could pose a risk if performance falters.

Positive Signals

The award to AS AND D, LLC suggests they met the necessary qualifications for this specialized support.
The contract duration indicates a level of confidence in the contractor's ability to perform over an extended period.
The USPTO's investment in these libraries underscores their importance to innovation and the economy.
The contract type (Delivery Order) implies it was part of a larger framework, potentially with pre-vetted capabilities.

Sector Analysis

The Facilities Support Services sector is a broad category encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of government facilities. This contract, specifically for patent and training libraries, falls within this sector, requiring specialized knowledge of information resource management alongside physical facility upkeep. Comparable spending benchmarks in this area are often tied to square footage, building complexity, and the specific services required, such as IT support, security, and environmental controls. The USPTO's significant investment reflects the critical nature of its intellectual property archives.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication from the provided data that this contract included a small business set-aside. The contractor, AS AND D, LLC, is not identified as a small business in this context. Therefore, the direct impact on small business set-asides is likely minimal. However, the potential for subcontracting opportunities with AS AND D, LLC could exist, offering avenues for small businesses to participate. The overall impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the extent to which AS AND D, LLC engages small businesses in its supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office contracting officers and program managers. They are responsible for monitoring performance, approving invoices, and ensuring compliance with contract terms. The use of a Delivery Order under a larger contract may imply some level of pre-existing oversight within the parent contract's framework. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which provide award details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Library and Information Services
Government Facilities Management Contracts
Intellectual Property Protection Services
Information Technology Support Services
Records Management Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
Limited competition may impact price competitiveness.
Contractor performance risk requires ongoing monitoring.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Commerce awarded $52.9 million to AS AND D, LLC. TRAINING AND PATENT LIBRARIES SUPPORT; IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AS AND D, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Commerce (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $52.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-04-14. End: 2020-08-15.

What is the track record of AS AND D, LLC in performing similar facilities support services for federal agencies?

Assessing the track record of AS AND D, LLC requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving facilities support, library management, and information resource maintenance. Data from the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or other contract performance databases would reveal the types of contracts they have held, their values, durations, and any reported performance ratings. A history of successful, on-time, and within-budget completions on comparable contracts would indicate a lower performance risk. Conversely, a record of disputes, contract terminations, or poor performance reviews would raise concerns about their capability to meet the USPTO's requirements effectively and efficiently.

How does the awarded amount compare to the estimated value or initial solicitations for this requirement?

To compare the awarded amount of $52.9 million to initial solicitations or estimates, one would need access to the original Request for Proposal (RFP) or contract announcement documents. These documents typically include a government estimate of the contract's value or a ceiling price. If the awarded amount is significantly higher than the initial estimate, it could suggest a less competitive bidding process, scope creep, or an underestimation by the government. Conversely, if the award is within or below the estimated range, it might indicate successful cost management during the procurement or effective negotiation by the government contracting team. Without the solicitation details, this comparison remains speculative.

What are the specific risks associated with the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' contract type?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' contract type presents a unique risk profile. While it aims for broad competition, the explicit exclusion of certain sources limits the potential bidder pool. This limitation can reduce competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher prices than if all qualified sources were allowed to bid. The risk lies in whether the exclusions were justified by essential technical requirements or past performance necessities. If the exclusions were arbitrary or overly restrictive, the government might not have secured the best possible value. Furthermore, understanding *why* sources were excluded is crucial for assessing fairness and potential bid protests.

How effective has Time and Materials (T&M) pricing been on similar USPTO or Commerce Department contracts?

The effectiveness of Time and Materials (T&M) pricing on similar USPTO or Commerce Department contracts is contingent on robust oversight and clear task definitions. T&M contracts offer flexibility but carry inherent risks of cost escalation if not managed diligently. Success often depends on the agency's ability to closely monitor labor hours, material costs, and the necessity of the work performed. Agencies that have strong project management and auditing capabilities tend to find T&M effective for requirements where the scope is not fully defined upfront. Conversely, agencies with weaker oversight mechanisms may experience cost overruns and reduced value for money. Analyzing past T&M contracts within these departments can reveal patterns of success or failure.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities support services at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) requires examining contract data over several fiscal years. This would involve identifying all contracts categorized under facilities support, maintenance, and related services awarded by the USPTO. By aggregating the annual spending on these services, one can identify patterns, such as increasing or decreasing budgets, significant one-time investments, or the impact of major facility projects. Understanding these trends provides context for the current $52.9 million award, helping to determine if it represents a typical expenditure, an increase, or a decrease in investment in these critical operational areas.

What are the implications of the contract duration (1219 days) on long-term facility management strategy?

A contract duration of 1219 days (approximately 3.4 years) for facilities support services has several implications for the USPTO's long-term strategy. Such a duration allows for stability and continuity in service delivery, enabling the contractor to develop deep familiarity with the facilities and operational needs. This can lead to efficiencies and improved performance over time. However, it also represents a significant commitment, potentially reducing the agency's flexibility to adapt to changing needs or to re-compete the contract for potentially better pricing or innovative solutions sooner. Strategic planning should consider whether this duration aligns with the USPTO's evolving requirements for its patent and training libraries and its overall facility modernization goals.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Arctic Slope Regional Corporation

Address: 3900 C STREET, STE-802, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $52,883,438

Exercised Options: $52,883,438

Current Obligation: $52,883,438

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 1

Total Subaward Amount: $7,507,453

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DOC50PAPT0701001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline