DoD awards $2.87M contract for shelf stocking and custodial services to CW Resources, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,867,036 ($2.9M)

Contractor: CW Resources, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-02-01

End Date: 2027-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SHELF STOCKING AND CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS

Place of Performance

Location: COLUMBUS, LOWNDES County, MISSISSIPPI, 39710

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $2.9 million to CW RESOURCES, INC. for work described as: SHELF STOCKING AND CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS Key points: 1. Contract awarded for essential support services at Defense Commissary Agency facilities. 2. The contract duration spans five years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 3. CW Resources, Inc. is the sole awardee, raising questions about competition. 4. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government. 5. Services include shelf stocking and custodial operations, vital for facility maintenance. 6. The contract is not set aside for small businesses, potentially limiting broader participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $2.87 million over five years averages to approximately $574,000 annually. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for shelf stocking and custodial services is challenging without more specific data on the scope of services and facility size. However, the annual cost per facility appears moderate, assuming this contract covers multiple locations or a significant single facility. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty, but it's crucial to ensure the pricing reflects efficient operations and avoids excessive profit margins.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning there was no open competition. The data indicates it was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION.' This approach bypasses the standard competitive bidding process, which typically leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government. Without a competitive solicitation, it is difficult to ascertain if the government received the best possible value or if alternative solutions were considered.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not benefit from the cost savings typically achieved through competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher overall expenditure for these services.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families benefit from well-maintained and stocked commissary facilities. The contract ensures the operational readiness and cleanliness of Defense Commissary Agency stores. Services are likely concentrated in Mississippi, where the contract is registered. The contract supports jobs related to logistics, stocking, and cleaning services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Sole-source award limits opportunities for other service providers.
Performance metrics and quality control are critical for sole-source contracts to ensure value.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty.
Long-term contract (5 years) suggests a stable and reliable service provider.
Focus on essential services like stocking and custodial care ensures operational efficiency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader support services sector, specifically focusing on facility maintenance and logistics. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous companies offering custodial and stocking solutions. However, government contracts often have specific requirements that can narrow the field. The Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) relies on these services to maintain its retail operations, which are crucial for military communities. Benchmarking against other government contracts for similar services would require detailed analysis of scope, location, and contract type.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the awardee, CW Resources, Inc., is not indicated as a small business. This means that opportunities for small business participation, either as prime contractors or subcontractors, were not explicitly prioritized in this procurement. While the contract doesn't preclude small businesses from subcontracting, the absence of a set-aside suggests a missed opportunity to foster small business growth within this specific service area.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Department of Defense and the Defense Commissary Agency. As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard government contract administration and oversight processes. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. Specific accountability measures would be detailed within the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards and remedies for non-compliance. Inspector General involvement would be triggered by allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Commissary Agency Operations
Facility Support Services
Logistics and Warehousing Support
Government Custodial Services
Retail Operations Support

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Potential for reduced service quality without competitive pressure.
Limited transparency in pricing justification.
Missed opportunity for small business participation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $2.9 million to CW RESOURCES, INC.. SHELF STOCKING AND CUSTODIAL OPERATIONS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CW RESOURCES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Commissary Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-02-01. End: 2027-01-31.

What is the track record of CW Resources, Inc. in performing similar government contracts?

CW Resources, Inc. has a history of performing government contracts, often focusing on services that align with their mission, which may include employing individuals with disabilities. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those involving shelf stocking and custodial operations for agencies like the Defense Commissary Agency or other military branches, would be crucial. This would involve reviewing past contract awards, performance evaluations (if publicly available), and any history of contract disputes or terminations. A review of their financial stability and capacity to handle a contract of this size and duration is also important. Without specific performance data for this contractor on comparable tasks, assessing their reliability and efficiency remains speculative.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to industry benchmarks for shelf stocking and custodial services?

Directly comparing the pricing of this $2.87 million, five-year contract to external industry benchmarks is challenging without a detailed breakdown of the services provided, the number of facilities covered, and the specific labor rates and overhead costs factored in. However, the average annual cost of approximately $574,000 suggests a significant operational scale. To assess value, one would need to compare this against similar government contracts awarded through competitive processes, considering factors like geographic location, facility size, and the exact scope of duties (e.g., frequency of cleaning, hours of stocking). If this sole-source contract's rates are significantly higher than comparable competitive contracts, it could indicate a lack of cost-effectiveness for the taxpayer.

What are the specific risks associated with a sole-source award for these essential services?

The primary risk of a sole-source award for shelf stocking and custodial services is the potential for inflated pricing due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without multiple bidders vying for the contract, the government may not achieve the most cost-effective solution. Another risk is complacency from the contractor, as there is no immediate threat of losing the business to a competitor. This could potentially lead to a decline in service quality or efficiency over the contract's duration. Furthermore, a sole-source award limits the government's ability to explore innovative solutions or leverage new technologies that might be offered by other potential providers in the market.

How effective are the oversight mechanisms for ensuring the quality and efficiency of services provided under this contract?

The effectiveness of oversight for this contract hinges on the diligence of the contracting officer's representatives (CORs) and the Defense Commissary Agency's management. Standard oversight involves regular performance reviews, site inspections, and monitoring of key performance indicators (KPIs) outlined in the contract. Given it's a firm fixed-price contract, the focus would be on ensuring all specified tasks are completed to the required standard. Robust oversight would include tracking service delivery metrics, addressing any deficiencies promptly, and ensuring compliance with all contractual terms. The absence of competition means that the government must be particularly vigilant in its oversight to ensure value for money and maintain service quality.

What is the historical spending pattern for shelf stocking and custodial services by the Defense Commissary Agency?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for shelf stocking and custodial services by the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) is crucial for context. This would involve examining previous contract awards for similar services, noting the contract values, durations, award types (competitive vs. sole-source), and the contractors involved. Understanding whether DeCA has historically relied on sole-source awards for these functions or if competitive bidding has been the norm can provide insight into the current procurement strategy. Significant increases in spending over time, especially without a clear justification like expanded operations or inflation, could signal potential issues with cost control or contract management.

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: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 200 MYRTLE ST, NEW BRITAIN, CT, 06053

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,450,657

Exercised Options: $3,450,657

Current Obligation: $2,867,036

Actual Outlays: $198,726

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline