Department of the Air Force's $86M facilities support contract awarded to PRIDE INDUSTRIES raises value and competition concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $85,955,176 ($86.0M)

Contractor: Pride Industries

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-12-29

End Date: 2021-11-30

Contract Duration: 1,797 days

Daily Burn Rate: $47.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF RECURRING WORK PROGRAM

Place of Performance

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

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $86.0 million to PRIDE INDUSTRIES for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF RECURRING WORK PROGRAM Key points: 1. The contract's value proposition is unclear due to a lack of competitive bidding and limited performance data. 2. Sole-source award suggests potential for inflated pricing and reduced incentive for cost efficiency. 3. The long duration of the contract (nearly 5 years) warrants scrutiny for ongoing value and adaptability. 4. Performance context is limited, making it difficult to assess if services met or exceeded expectations. 5. The contract falls within Facilities Support Services, a broad category with varying market dynamics. 6. Lack of small business participation noted, potentially limiting broader economic impact.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $85.9M facilities support contract is challenging without comparative data on similar sole-source awards or detailed performance metrics. The firm-fixed-price structure provides some cost certainty, but the absence of competition limits the ability to assess if the pricing reflects market rates or represents a premium. Without clear performance benchmarks or comparisons to other government facilities contracts, it's difficult to definitively state whether the Air Force received excellent value for its investment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not openly competed. This significantly limits the number of potential bidders and removes the downward price pressure typically associated with a competitive procurement process. While sole-source awards can be justified under specific circumstances (e.g., urgency, unique capabilities), they generally lead to less favorable pricing and reduced innovation compared to full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a higher price for these services due to the lack of competition. The absence of multiple bids means there was no direct incentive for contractors to offer their most competitive rates.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force facilities requiring maintenance and support services. Services delivered include a broad range of facilities support, likely encompassing maintenance, repair, and operational services. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the contract was performed. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for individuals performing the facilities support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Limited transparency on performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Sole-source award raises questions about the necessity and justification for not competing.
Long contract duration without clear performance reviews could mask inefficiencies.
Absence of small business set-aside may limit opportunities for smaller service providers.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
PRIDE INDUSTRIES is an established contractor, potentially bringing experience to the role.
The contract addresses essential facilities support needs for the Air Force.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a significant sector within government contracting, encompassing a wide array of services from building maintenance and operations to groundskeeping and custodial services. The market is diverse, with both large corporations and smaller specialized firms competing. Government spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need to maintain extensive real property portfolios. This contract represents a portion of that broader spending, but its sole-source nature makes direct comparison to market benchmarks difficult.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have included a small business set-aside, nor is there an indication of significant subcontracting to small businesses. The award to a single, likely larger, entity suggests that opportunities for small businesses in this specific procurement were limited. This could mean a missed opportunity to foster the small business ecosystem within the facilities support sector for this particular requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the agency's contract management office. Accountability is primarily driven by the firm-fixed-price terms and any performance standards outlined in the contract. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature and the lack of publicly available detailed performance reports. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support (BOS)
Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Government Property Management Services
Logistics and Support Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing pressure.
Limited public performance data hinders value assessment.
Potential for cost overruns due to lack of competition.
Unclear justification for not competing the requirement.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $86.0 million to PRIDE INDUSTRIES. IGF::OT::IGF RECURRING WORK PROGRAM

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 $86.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-12-29. End: 2021-11-30.

What is the track record of PRIDE INDUSTRIES with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies?

PRIDE INDUSTRIES has a significant history of contracting with the federal government, particularly the Department of Defense. While specific details on past performance quality for this exact contract are not readily available in the provided data, their extensive contract history suggests a level of established capability. Analyzing past performance reviews, any documented disputes, or contract terminations for PRIDE INDUSTRIES across various federal agencies would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and effectiveness as a contractor. This context is crucial for assessing the risk associated with awarding a large, sole-source contract.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar facilities support contracts awarded competitively?

Direct price comparison is difficult due to the sole-source nature of this award. Competitively awarded contracts for similar facilities support services would likely have undergone a bidding process, allowing for price discovery and potentially lower rates. Without access to the specific line-item pricing and service levels within this contract, and without comparable bids from other firms, it's impossible to definitively state if the pricing is above or below market. However, sole-source awards inherently carry a higher risk of non-competitive pricing compared to those obtained through full and open competition.

What specific risks are associated with a sole-source award for facilities support services?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for facilities support services include potential overpricing due to lack of competition, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve efficiency, and a diminished ability for the government to ensure it is receiving the best possible value. There's also a risk that the government may not be aware of alternative solutions or more cost-effective providers. Furthermore, if the sole-source justification was weak, it could indicate a lack of proper planning or market research by the agency.

What were the specific justifications for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded under 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' which is a general classification. Specific justifications for sole-source awards typically fall under FAR Part 6, such as the existence of only one responsible source, urgency, or specific national defense needs. Without further documentation (e.g., Justification and Approval - J&A document), the precise reasons for not competing this significant facilities support contract remain unclear. Understanding these justifications is key to assessing the appropriateness of the award method.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services by the Department of the Air Force?

The Department of the Air Force, like other branches of the military, consistently spends significant amounts on facilities support services due to its vast infrastructure. Historical spending trends in this category are generally upward, driven by the need to maintain aging facilities, expand capabilities, and ensure operational readiness. Analyzing past years' spending on similar contracts (both competitive and sole-source) would reveal if this $86M award is in line with historical patterns, represents an increase, or deviates significantly, potentially signaling a change in requirements or contracting strategy.

How has the performance of PRIDE INDUSTRIES on this contract been evaluated?

The provided data does not include specific performance evaluations or metrics for this contract. Assessing performance would require access to contract performance reports, customer satisfaction surveys, or any documented issues or commendations. Given the contract's duration (nearly 5 years), a thorough review of its performance history is essential to understand if the services delivered met the Air Force's requirements and if the contractor fulfilled its obligations satisfactorily. Without this information, the effectiveness of the contract remains largely unknown.

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

Solicitation ID: FA281616R0012

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10030 FOOTHILLS BLVD, ROSEVILLE, CA, 95747

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $96,093,219

Exercised Options: $96,093,219

Current Obligation: $85,955,176

Actual Outlays: $6,863,890

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline