DoD's $24.8M contract with Valiant Government Services for support services shows fair value, but limited competition raises concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,769,898 ($24.8M)

Contractor: Valiant Government Services LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-10-31

End Date: 2010-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,703 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: RIDGECREST, KERN County, CALIFORNIA, 93555

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.8 million to VALIANT GOVERNMENT SERVICES LLC for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar support service contracts. 2. Competition was limited, suggesting potential for higher pricing than a fully open market. 3. The firm fixed-price structure mitigates cost overrun risks for the government. 4. Performance duration of over 5 years indicates a need for consistent service delivery. 5. This contract falls within the broad professional and management support services sector. 6. The contractor has a significant presence in government contracting, suggesting experience.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of approximately $24.8 million over its period of performance appears to be within a reasonable range for the support services provided. Benchmarking against similar contracts for administrative and operational support services within the Department of Defense suggests that the pricing is competitive. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract further supports value by capping the government's financial exposure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while competition was sought, certain sources were excluded, leading to a limited pool of bidders. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the award type suggests a less competitive environment than a standard full and open competition. This limited competition may have influenced the final pricing and the range of solutions considered.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers compared to a scenario with numerous bidders vying for the contract. It also reduces the government's leverage in price negotiations.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from consistent and experienced support services, enabling mission readiness. Services provided likely include administrative, logistical, or operational support crucial for naval operations. The contract's performance in California suggests a direct impact on regional military installations and personnel. Workforce implications include the potential for employment opportunities within the contractor's organization in the specified geographic area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may have restricted the government's ability to secure the lowest possible price.
The long contract duration could lead to vendor lock-in if not managed carefully.
Exclusion of sources, even if justified, reduces the overall competitive landscape.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government.
Contractor's established presence suggests a lower risk of performance failure.
The contract supports critical defense operations, ensuring mission continuity.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically under 'All Other Support Services.' This broad category encompasses a wide range of non-professional services essential for government operations. The market for such services is substantial, with numerous companies offering specialized support. Comparable spending benchmarks in this area are difficult to pinpoint due to the diverse nature of 'support services,' but the contract value is moderate for a multi-year federal award.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this specific contract, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) and 'sb' (small business) flags are false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and the impact on the small business ecosystem would be indirect, potentially through opportunities if Valiant Government Services utilizes small business subcontractors, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program managers within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS, where award details are published. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Administrative Support Contracts
Naval Operations Support Services
Professional and Management Support Services
Government Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs) for Support Services

Risk Flags

Limited competition may impact price.
Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly.
Contractor performance monitoring is crucial.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.8 million to VALIANT GOVERNMENT SERVICES LLC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is VALIANT GOVERNMENT SERVICES LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-10-31. End: 2010-06-30.

What is the track record of Valiant Government Services LLC with the Department of Defense?

Valiant Government Services LLC has a substantial track record with the Department of Defense, having been awarded numerous contracts over the years. Their portfolio includes a variety of service contracts, ranging from administrative and operational support to specialized technical services. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts would reveal their ability to meet deadlines, manage budgets, and satisfy performance requirements. A review of past performance evaluations, if publicly available, would provide deeper insights into their reliability and effectiveness as a government contractor. Their consistent award of contracts suggests a level of trust and proven capability within the DoD ecosystem.

How does the $24.8 million contract value compare to similar support services contracts awarded by the Navy?

The $24.8 million contract value for support services awarded to Valiant Government Services LLC is a moderate-sized award for the Department of the Navy over its duration. When compared to other contracts for similar 'All Other Support Services' (NAICS 561990) or broader administrative and operational support, this figure falls within a common range. Larger, more complex service contracts can easily exceed hundreds of millions of dollars, while smaller, more specialized tasks might be in the low millions. The firm fixed-price nature also implies that the scope was well-defined, making direct comparisons to cost-plus contracts less meaningful. Benchmarking against contracts with similar performance periods and geographic locations would provide a more precise assessment of value.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract?

The primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price (FFP) contract are minimal for the government in terms of cost overruns, as the price is set. However, risks can emerge if the contract scope is not clearly defined, potentially leading to disputes over what services are included. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating the effort required, which could lead to reduced profit margins or even losses if costs exceed the fixed price. Another risk is the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or service delivery to maintain profitability, necessitating robust government oversight and performance monitoring. The 'limited' competition aspect also carries a risk that the government may not have received the most innovative or cost-effective solutions available in the market.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award method for ensuring value?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award method is intended to balance the need for competition with specific circumstances that may preclude certain sources. While it allows for a broader range of potential bidders than a sole-source award, it is inherently less competitive than a standard 'Full and Open Competition.' The effectiveness in ensuring value depends heavily on the justification for excluding sources and the number of bidders that remain. If the exclusion was necessary and a sufficient number of qualified bidders still participated, good value can be achieved. However, if the exclusion significantly limits the bidder pool, it can reduce price competition and potentially lead to higher costs for the government, thus diminishing the overall value proposition compared to a truly open market scenario.

What are the historical spending patterns for 'All Other Support Services' within the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending patterns for 'All Other Support Services' (NAICS 561990) within the Department of the Navy are substantial and reflect the diverse operational needs of the naval forces. This category often includes a wide array of services such as facilities support, logistics, administrative assistance, and specialized operational support that do not fit neatly into other service categories. Spending in this area can fluctuate based on operational tempo, base realignments, and specific mission requirements. Analyzing historical data reveals consistent demand for these services, with significant annual outlays across various naval commands and installations. The Navy often utilizes both competitive and non-competitive contract vehicles to procure these services, depending on urgency and market availability.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Other Support Services › All Other 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: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: ABM Industries Inc (UEI: 006911622)

Address: 3999 FORT CAMPBELL BLVD, HOPKINSVILLE, KY, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $164,935,693

Exercised Options: $17,760,280

Current Obligation: $24,769,898

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6871199D3322

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline