DoD's $75M Facilities Support Contract with Chugach Support Services Faces Scrutiny Over Value and Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $74,932,261 ($74.9M)
Contractor: Chugach Support Services, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2002-11-26
End Date: 2015-05-08
Contract Duration: 4,546 days
Daily Burn Rate: $16.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Place of Performance
Location: KING SALMON, BRISTOL BAY County, ALASKA, 99613, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
State: Alaska Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $74.9 million to CHUGACH SUPPORT SERVICES, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Chugach Support Services, Inc. for facilities support services totaled $74.9 million. 2. Awarded by the Department of the Air Force, the contract utilized 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources'. 3. The contract duration was 4546 days, spanning from 2002 to 2015. 4. The contract was not awarded to a small business. 5. The PSC code is missing, hindering direct sector comparison.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The total award value of $74.9 million over a long duration suggests a significant investment. Without specific performance metrics or comparable contract data, assessing the value for money is difficult. The fixed-price award fee structure implies some performance-based incentives, but the overall value proposition remains unclear.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The competition method 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' is unusual and suggests that while open to all, certain sources were initially excluded, potentially limiting the competitive pool and impacting price discovery. This method warrants further investigation into the rationale for exclusion.
Taxpayer Impact: The long duration and substantial value of this contract represent a significant allocation of taxpayer funds. The limited competition method raises concerns about whether the government achieved the best possible price and value.
Public Impact
Taxpayers funded a substantial $74.9 million contract for facilities support over more than a decade. The contract's competitive process, 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' raises questions about fairness and potential price inflation. The lack of small business participation means opportunities for smaller, potentially more agile companies were missed. The extended contract period could indicate a long-term need but also risks locking the government into potentially outdated service models.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Ambiguous competition method
- Lack of small business participation
- Missing PSC code for sector benchmarking
- Long contract duration without clear performance data
Positive Signals
- Awarded by a major agency (Department of Defense)
- Utilized a fixed-price award fee structure
Sector Analysis
Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a broad category encompassing maintenance, operation, and management of facilities. Spending in this sector can vary widely based on the scope of services and the type of facilities managed. Benchmarking is difficult without a specific PSC.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not awarded to a small business, as indicated by the 'sb' field being false. This means that opportunities for small businesses to compete for and perform this significant facilities support work were not realized under this specific award.
Oversight & Accountability
The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method suggests a specific procurement strategy that may have limited the breadth of competition. Further review of the justification for excluding sources and the overall oversight of this long-term contract is warranted to ensure accountability and value.
Related Government Programs
- Facilities Support Services
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Department of the Air Force Programs
Risk Flags
- Ambiguous competition method raises concerns about fairness and price.
- Lack of small business participation limits economic opportunity.
- Long contract duration may not reflect current market conditions or needs.
- Missing PSC code hinders benchmarking and sector analysis.
- Potential for suboptimal value due to limited competition.
Tags
facilities-support-services, department-of-defense, ak, dca, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $74.9 million to CHUGACH SUPPORT SERVICES, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CHUGACH SUPPORT SERVICES, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $74.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2002-11-26. End: 2015-05-08.
What was the specific justification for excluding certain sources in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method, and how did this impact the final price?
The justification for excluding sources under this procurement method is critical. Typically, such exclusions are based on specific technical requirements, past performance, or unique capabilities. Understanding this rationale is key to determining if the exclusion was necessary and if it led to a suboptimal price discovery process, potentially costing taxpayers more than a truly open competition might have.
How did the performance of Chugach Support Services, Inc. align with the 'award fee' component of the contract, and was the fee structure effective in driving desired outcomes?
The effectiveness of the 'award fee' structure is paramount in assessing contract value. Without access to performance evaluations and the actual award fee amounts paid, it's impossible to determine if the contractor met or exceeded expectations. A review of performance metrics and the justification for awarded fees would reveal if this incentive mechanism successfully drove efficiency and quality in facilities support services.
Given the contract's duration and value, what mechanisms were in place to ensure the services remained relevant and cost-effective throughout its lifecycle?
Long-term contracts require robust mechanisms for adaptation and cost control. It's important to understand if periodic reviews, scope adjustments, or re-competition strategies were employed to ensure the services remained aligned with evolving needs and market prices. Without such measures, the government risks paying for outdated services or inflated costs over an extended period.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE AWARD FEE (M)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Chugach Alaska Corporation (UEI: 071844021)
Address: 560 EAST 34TH AVENUE, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503
Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2002-11-26
Current End Date: 2015-05-08
Potential End Date: 2015-05-08 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-09-03
More Contracts from Chugach Support Services, Inc.
- 200211!000391!5700!JA02 !aetc Cons/Cc !F4168902C0024 !A!N! !Y! !20020801!20020930!608253824!608253824!071844021!n!chugach Support Services, Inc !560 East 34TH Avenue !anchorage !ak!99503!72875!005!12!tyndall AFB !BAY !florida !+000000079752!n!n!000000000000!m152!operation/Maintenance Buildings !S1 !services !3000!NOT Discernable or Classified !561210!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !n!z!b!n!l!1!001!n!5a!c!y!z! ! !n!a!n!n!e! ! ! !d!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $171.4M (Department of Defense)
- 200612!140461!1700!n62473!navfac Southwest !N4425502D9000 !A!N! !Y!FB00 !92 !20051001!20040930!608253824!608253824!071844021!n!chugach Support Services, Inc !560 E 34TH Avenue !anchorage !ak!99503!24500!001!32!fallon NAS !churchill !nevada !+000023738253!n!n!000000000000!s216!facilities Operations Support Services !S1 !services !000 !NOT Discernable !561210!E! !5!B!S!C! ! !99990909!B! ! !n!z!b!n!j!1!001!n!5a!c!n!z! ! !n!a!n!n!e! ! ! !d!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! !1725!N60495!0001! ! — $96.1M (Department of Defense)
- Option Year 7, FFP Annexes 1-15 FY 10 Fund Obligation — $29.2M (Department of Defense)
- Option Year 8, FFP, Annexes 1-15 — $28.9M (Department of Defense)
- Option Year Nine, Annexes 1-15 — $27.2M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)