DoD's $31M Facilities Maintenance Contract Awarded to PRIDE INDUSTRIES Raises Questions on Competition and Value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,970,949 ($31.0M)

Contractor: Pride Industries

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-04-17

End Date: 2012-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,750 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FACILITY MAINTENANCE LAAFB/FT MAC (O&M)

Place of Performance

Location: EL SEGUNDO, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 90245

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.0 million to PRIDE INDUSTRIES for work described as: FACILITY MAINTENANCE LAAFB/FT MAC (O&M) Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a non-competitive basis, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs. 2. Significant duration of the contract (over 4 years) suggests a long-term need for these services. 3. The fixed-price contract type offers some cost certainty but may not fully capture efficiencies. 4. The specific NAICS code (561210) indicates a focus on comprehensive facilities support. 5. The contract's value of over $30 million warrants close scrutiny for value for money. 6. Lack of competition is a key risk indicator for potential overpricing or reduced service quality.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $30.97 million contract is challenging due to the lack of competitive bids. Without comparable contract data or market analysis, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing reflects fair market value. The fixed-price nature provides some predictability, but the absence of competition means there's less pressure on the contractor to offer the most cost-effective solution. Further analysis would require comparing the scope of services and pricing to similar facilities maintenance contracts awarded competitively within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' (NAF) status, indicating a sole-source procurement. This means that only one contractor, PRIDE INDUSTRIES, was solicited and awarded the contract. The lack of a competitive bidding process prevents other qualified vendors from offering their services and potentially lower prices. This approach is typically used when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement, but it significantly reduces the opportunity for price discovery and may lead to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium for these services due to the absence of competitive pressure. The government missed an opportunity to leverage market forces to secure the best possible price and value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force and personnel at LAAFB/FT MAC, who receive essential facilities maintenance and operations support. Services delivered include a broad range of facilities support, ensuring the operational readiness and habitability of military installations. The geographic impact is localized to the specific Air Force bases where the contract is performed. The contract supports jobs within the facilities maintenance sector, likely benefiting PRIDE INDUSTRIES' workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Non-competitive award limits oversight and potential for cost savings.
Long contract duration without clear performance metrics makes ongoing value assessment difficult.
Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification process.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract provides some cost predictability.
PRIDE INDUSTRIES is an established provider, suggesting potential for reliable service delivery.
Contract supports critical base operations, ensuring readiness.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) represent a significant segment of the government contracting market, encompassing a wide array of maintenance, repair, and operational services for federal facilities. This contract fits within the broader 'Operations and Maintenance' (O&M) spending category for the Department of Defense. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale O&M contracts awarded to private sector firms for managing military bases or government buildings, considering factors like square footage, service scope, and geographic location.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a small business set-aside. However, as a large prime contract, PRIDE INDUSTRIES may engage small businesses as subcontractors, but this is not mandated by the contract terms as presented. The absence of a small business focus in this specific award means it does not directly contribute to the government's small business contracting goals.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are typically embedded within the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or alleged.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Air Force Base Operations and Maintenance
Federal Facilities Support Services
Non-Competitive Government Contracts
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Spending

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
Potential for cost overruns due to lack of competition.
Limited transparency in procurement process.
Long contract duration without clear performance benchmarks.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.0 million to PRIDE INDUSTRIES. FACILITY MAINTENANCE LAAFB/FT MAC (O&M)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PRIDE INDUSTRIES.

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 $31.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-04-17. End: 2012-01-31.

What is the track record of PRIDE INDUSTRIES in performing similar federal contracts, particularly those awarded non-competitively?

PRIDE INDUSTRIES has a history of performing facilities maintenance and management services for various government agencies. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, especially those awarded non-competitively, is crucial. This includes reviewing past performance evaluations, any contract disputes or terminations, and their ability to meet performance standards and delivery timelines. A review of federal procurement data would reveal the extent and nature of their prior government work. Understanding their experience with large-scale, long-duration contracts like this one provides insight into their capacity and reliability as a contractor. Without specific performance data for this contract, historical performance on comparable contracts serves as a proxy for assessing their capabilities and potential risks.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar facilities maintenance contracts awarded competitively by the Department of Defense?

Direct comparison of pricing is difficult without access to detailed cost breakdowns and the specific scope of work for this $30.97 million contract, especially given its sole-source nature. However, a general benchmark can be established by examining other large-scale facilities maintenance and operations contracts awarded competitively by the Air Force or other DoD components. Factors such as square footage of facilities managed, types of services included (e.g., janitorial, HVAC, groundskeeping, minor repairs), labor rates, and geographic location are key variables. If this contract's per-square-foot cost or per-service-unit cost is significantly higher than competitively awarded contracts with similar scopes, it would indicate potential overpricing due to the lack of competition. A thorough value-for-money assessment would require a detailed cost-benefit analysis against market rates and competitive benchmarks.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding a facilities maintenance contract of this magnitude on a sole-source basis?

The primary risk associated with awarding a facilities maintenance contract of this magnitude on a sole-source basis is the potential for inflated costs and reduced value for money. Without competition, there is less incentive for the contractor to optimize efficiency or offer the lowest possible price. This can lead to the government paying more than necessary for the services rendered. Another significant risk is the potential for complacency in service quality, as the contractor faces no direct threat from competitors. Furthermore, the lack of a competitive process limits transparency and makes it harder to ensure that the chosen contractor is truly the best value option available. This approach can also stifle innovation, as there is less pressure to introduce new technologies or more cost-effective methods.

What is the expected effectiveness of PRIDE INDUSTRIES in delivering facilities maintenance services over the contract's duration, given its non-competitive award?

The expected effectiveness of PRIDE INDUSTRIES hinges on their established capabilities and past performance, rather than the competitive nature of this specific award. As a sole-source contract, effectiveness will largely depend on the clarity of the contract's performance standards, service level agreements (SLAs), and the government's ability to monitor and enforce these requirements. If PRIDE INDUSTRIES has a strong track record of delivering quality services and the Air Force has robust oversight mechanisms in place, the contract can be effective. However, the lack of competitive pressure means that the government must be particularly diligent in performance management to ensure that service levels are maintained and that the contract continues to represent good value throughout its term. Without ongoing competitive pressure, proactive contract management is paramount.

How does this contract's value and duration compare to historical federal spending on facilities maintenance at LAAFB/FT MAC or similar installations?

To assess historical spending patterns, one would need to analyze previous contracts for facilities maintenance at LAAFB/FT MAC and comparable Air Force installations. This involves looking at the total dollar value of prior contracts, their duration, the number of competitors involved, and the specific services rendered. Comparing the $30.97 million value and the approximate 4.5-year duration (1750 days) of this contract against historical data can reveal trends. For instance, has spending increased or decreased? Has the duration of contracts changed? Was there a shift from competitive to non-competitive awards? Understanding these historical patterns provides context for the current contract's significance and potential implications for future spending and procurement strategies within the Air Force.

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: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10030 FOOTHILLS BLVD, ROSEVILLE, CA, 03

Business Categories: AbilityOne Program Participant, Category Business, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,653,767

Exercised Options: $31,158,899

Current Obligation: $30,970,949

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline