DHS awarded $50.5M for security services, with over $2.5M for specific guard services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $50,538,583 ($50.5M)

Contractor: Ahtna Technical Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2008-11-18

End Date: 2013-05-31

Contract Duration: 1,655 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FUNDS PROVIDED FOR NOVEMBER 1, 2008-NOV 29, 2008 FOR CLIN 0002. AND FUND CLIN 0006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 AND CLIN 0007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,543,186.

Place of Performance

Location: LOS FRESNOS, CAMERON County, TEXAS, 78566

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $50.5 million to AHTNA TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. for work described as: FUNDS PROVIDED FOR NOVEMBER 1, 2008-NOV 29, 2008 FOR CLIN 0002. AND FUND CLIN 0006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 AND CLIN 0007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,543,186. Key points: 1. Contract awarded to AHTNA TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. for security guard and patrol services. 2. Significant portion of funds allocated to specific service lines, indicating focused needs. 3. Contract duration spans over 4 years, suggesting a long-term requirement. 4. Awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES', requiring justification. 5. The contract type is FIRM FIXED PRICE, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 6. The base contract value is substantial, indicating a significant operational requirement for DHS. 7. The contract was awarded in late 2008, with services extending into 2013.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $50.5M over approximately 4.5 years for security services is substantial. Without specific benchmarks for similar large-scale security contracts within DHS or other agencies, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the allocation of over $2.5M to a single CLIN (0007) for guard services suggests a significant component of the overall requirement. The FIRM FIXED PRICE contract type generally provides cost certainty for the government, but the initial pricing and subsequent modifications would be key to a full value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. This procurement method implies that while full and open competition was intended, certain sources were excluded, necessitating a justification. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated in the provided data, but the exclusion of sources suggests a potentially limited competitive pool compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition. This could impact price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs if the excluded sources represented significant competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources in the competition process may limit the government's ability to secure the lowest possible price, potentially resulting in less favorable value for taxpayers. A more robust competition could have driven down costs through aggressive bidding.

Public Impact

Benefits the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) by providing essential security guard and patrol services. Ensures the safety and security of federal facilities and personnel managed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The services are geographically focused in Texas (ST: TX, SN: TEXAS). Supports jobs within the security services industry, particularly in Texas.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' justification needs thorough review to ensure it was appropriate and did not unduly limit competition.
The FIRM FIXED PRICE contract type requires careful monitoring to ensure the contractor is not overcharging for services, especially given the long duration.
The significant funding for specific CLINs warrants scrutiny to ensure funds are being used efficiently and as intended.
The contract's duration of over 4 years could lead to potential cost increases due to inflation or changing security needs if not managed proactively.

Positive Signals

The use of FIRM FIXED PRICE contract type provides budget certainty for the government.
The contract was awarded to AHTNA TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., suggesting established capabilities in providing security services.
The contract covers a critical function for DHS, contributing to national security.
The services are geographically specific, allowing for focused resource allocation and management.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Security and Protection Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. The market for security services is large and competitive, with numerous providers ranging from small businesses to large corporations. Government contracts for security services are common across many federal agencies, particularly those with significant physical infrastructure or sensitive operations, such as DHS. Benchmarks for similar contracts would typically consider the number of personnel, hours of service, geographic coverage, and specific security requirements (e.g., armed vs. unarmed guards, specialized surveillance).

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (SS: false, SB: false). AHTNA TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. is likely a larger entity. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or actual performance with small businesses. This contract, therefore, does not appear to directly contribute to small business set-aside goals, and its impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether the prime contractor utilizes small businesses for any subcontracting opportunities, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) contracting officers and program managers within DHS. The contract's duration and value suggest regular performance reviews and financial oversight would be necessary. Transparency would be facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or reported.

Related Government Programs

DHS Security Contracts
ICE Facilities Management
Federal Protective Service Contracts
Security Guard Services
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Risk Flags

Limited Competition Justification
Long Contract Duration
Potential for Cost Overruns/Underruns in FFP
Lack of Small Business Subcontracting Data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $50.5 million to AHTNA TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.. FUNDS PROVIDED FOR NOVEMBER 1, 2008-NOV 29, 2008 FOR CLIN 0002. AND FUND CLIN 0006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 AND CLIN 0007 IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,543,186.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AHTNA TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $50.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-11-18. End: 2013-05-31.

What specific services were included under CLIN 0007, which received $2,543,186 of the total funding?

CLIN 0007, funded at $2,543,186, specifically covers 'SECURITY GUARDS AND PATROL SERVICES'. While the exact nature of these services isn't detailed further in the provided snippet, it implies the provision of personnel to patrol and guard specific locations or assets managed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This could range from unarmed security personnel for access control and monitoring to potentially more specialized patrol duties depending on the contract's statement of work. The significant funding for this specific CLIN suggests it represents a core and substantial requirement within the overall contract.

What is the justification for awarding this contract under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'?

The procurement method 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' indicates that the agency intended to compete the contract broadly but subsequently excluded certain potential offerors. The specific reasons for this exclusion are not provided in the data snippet but typically require a documented justification based on federal acquisition regulations. Common reasons include national security concerns, the need for specific proprietary technology or expertise only available from certain sources, or prior performance issues with excluded contractors. Without the official justification, it's difficult to assess if this exclusion was appropriate and if it potentially limited the competitive landscape, thereby impacting price discovery and value for the government.

How does the $50.5M total award compare to other similar security contracts awarded by DHS or other federal agencies?

A direct comparison of the $50.5M award requires access to a broader dataset of federal contracts for security guard and patrol services. However, for a contract spanning over 4.5 years (November 2008 - May 2013), this amount represents a significant investment. Large federal agencies like DHS often award multi-million dollar contracts for security due to the scale of their operations and the critical nature of protecting federal assets and personnel. To assess value, one would benchmark this against contracts with similar scope, duration, geographic coverage, and service levels (e.g., number of guards, hours, required certifications). The FIRM FIXED PRICE nature suggests a defined scope, but the total value indicates a substantial ongoing requirement.

What are the potential risks associated with a FIRM FIXED PRICE contract of this magnitude and duration?

A FIRM FIXED PRICE (FFP) contract, while offering cost certainty to the government, carries risks, especially for a contract valued at $50.5M over 4.5 years. The primary risk is that the contractor may face unforeseen cost increases (e.g., labor, fuel, materials) that erode their profit margin, potentially leading to quality compromises or contractor default if the price becomes unsustainable. Conversely, if the contractor significantly underestimates costs or the government's needs are less than anticipated, the FFP structure can result in the government overpaying for the actual services received. Effective oversight is crucial to ensure the contractor maintains performance standards and that the pricing remains fair throughout the contract life, especially considering potential economic fluctuations over the 4.5-year period.

What was the spending pattern for this contract in the years leading up to its expiration in 2013?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded in November 2008 with an end date of May 2013, covering a period of approximately 54 months. The total award amount is $50,538,583. To understand the spending pattern, one would need to examine the funding actions month-by-month or year-by-year. Given the total award, the average annual spending would be roughly $11.2 million ($50.5M / 4.5 years). However, spending might not have been uniform. Initial years might have seen lower obligation amounts as the services ramped up, with higher obligations in subsequent years, or vice-versa depending on the phasing of security needs. Examining the specific funding obligations over the contract's life would reveal the actual spending trajectory.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Guards and Patrol 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

Solicitation ID: HSCEDM-08-R-00007

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Ahtna, Incorporated (UEI: 069586055)

Address: 1400 W BENSON BLVD STE 210, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $50,538,583

Exercised Options: $50,538,583

Current Obligation: $50,538,583

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSCEDM08D00002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline