DHS awards $33.2M contract for facilities support services to Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $33,216,731 ($33.2M)

Contractor: Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2010-07-01

End Date: 2011-06-30

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $91.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: EXERCISE THE FIRST OPTION PERIOD

Place of Performance

Location: EL CENTRO, IMPERIAL County, CALIFORNIA, 92243

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $33.2 million to ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P. for work described as: EXERCISE THE FIRST OPTION PERIOD Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in maintaining secure and functional facilities for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are favorable, with three bidders vying for the award, suggesting a healthy market. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type helps mitigate cost overrun risks for the government. 4. This award falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a critical component of government operations. 5. The contract duration of one year for this option period indicates ongoing operational needs. 6. The geographic location in California suggests a focus on facilities within that state.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The awarded amount of $33.2 million for a one-year period for facilities support services appears reasonable given the scope of services typically required by a federal agency like ICE. Benchmarking against similar contracts for facilities management and security services would provide a more precise value assessment. However, the firm-fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the government has negotiated a set price, which is generally a positive indicator for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with three bidders participating. This level of competition is generally considered healthy and suggests that multiple capable vendors were available to bid on the requirement. The presence of multiple bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of solutions being considered by the agency.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition ensures that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel and operations, who will receive secure and well-maintained facilities. Services delivered include facilities support, likely encompassing maintenance, security, and operational upkeep of ICE facilities. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, where the facilities managed under this contract are located. Workforce implications include the potential for employment opportunities for security personnel, maintenance staff, and administrative support within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for over-reliance on a single contractor for critical facility services.
Need for robust performance monitoring to ensure service quality meets expectations.
Geographic concentration may limit opportunities for other regional providers.

Positive Signals

Award to a contractor with a demonstrated track record in asset protection and security services.
Firm-fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty.
Full and open competition indicates a robust bidding process.

Sector Analysis

The Facilities Support Services sector is a broad category encompassing a wide range of services essential for the operation and maintenance of government and commercial properties. This includes everything from janitorial and landscaping to security and building management. Federal spending in this sector is substantial, driven by the vast real estate portfolio managed by various government agencies. Contracts like this one are crucial for ensuring the operational readiness and security of critical government infrastructure.

Small Business Impact

The 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 set-aside requirement. However, the prime contractor, Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P., may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall business strategy, which could indirectly benefit the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by contracting officers and program managers within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Performance standards and deliverables are outlined in the contract, and regular reviews would assess compliance. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific operational details may be sensitive. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Homeland Security would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Federal Buildings and Facilities Maintenance
Government Security Services
Immigration and Customs Enforcement Operations Support
Department of Homeland Security Contracts
Facilities Management Services

Risk Flags

Potential for service disruption
Contractor performance variability
Security risks

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $33.2 million to ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P.. EXERCISE THE FIRST OPTION PERIOD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P..

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 $33.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-07-01. End: 2011-06-30.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement over the past five years?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities support services by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) requires access to detailed federal procurement data. Generally, agencies like ICE have consistent needs for facility maintenance and security, leading to relatively stable or incrementally increasing spending in this area, often influenced by inflation, facility expansion or consolidation, and shifts in operational priorities. Without specific data, it's difficult to provide exact figures, but one would expect to see multi-million dollar annual expenditures reflecting the scale of ICE's infrastructure requirements across various locations. Option periods, like the one exercised here, suggest a continuation of established service needs rather than a significant new program.

How does the per-unit cost of services under this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar facilities support contracts?

Determining the precise per-unit cost comparison for this contract is challenging without a detailed breakdown of the services provided and their associated quantities (e.g., cost per square foot maintained, cost per security guard hour). However, the contract's firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the government has aimed for cost certainty. Industry benchmarks for facilities support services vary widely based on geographic location, facility type (e.g., office building, detention center), and the specific services included (e.g., basic maintenance vs. comprehensive security). A preliminary assessment would involve comparing the total contract value ($33.2M) against the estimated square footage or number of facilities managed. If this contract covers a large number of high-security facilities in a high-cost area like California, the per-unit cost might align with or even be below market rates due to the scale and competitive bidding process.

What is the track record of Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P. in performing similar federal contracts?

Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P. (APSS) has a history of performing federal contracts, particularly in the realm of security and facilities support. Reviewing their contract performance history, including past performance evaluations and any reported issues or successes on similar government contracts, is crucial. Agencies typically consider past performance as a significant factor in award decisions. APSS's ability to secure this $33.2 million contract with ICE, especially under full and open competition, suggests a positive track record. Further due diligence would involve examining their performance on previous ICE or Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contracts, looking for indicators of reliability, quality of service, and adherence to contract terms.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this facilities support contract?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a facilities support contract like this typically focus on service delivery, operational efficiency, and security effectiveness. Common KPIs might include response times for maintenance requests, uptime percentages for critical building systems (HVAC, power), security incident response rates, adherence to safety protocols, cleanliness standards, and overall client satisfaction. For ICE facilities, specific security-related KPIs would be paramount, ensuring the integrity and safety of personnel and assets. The contract documents would detail these specific KPIs, along with the methodologies for measurement and the acceptable performance thresholds. Failure to meet these KPIs could result in penalties or impact future contract renewals.

Are there any identified risks associated with the performance of this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Potential risks for this facilities support contract could include service disruptions due to unforeseen events (e.g., natural disasters, pandemics), contractor performance issues (e.g., staffing shortages, inadequate service quality), or security breaches. Mitigation strategies are typically embedded within the contract itself and through ongoing government oversight. The firm-fixed-price structure helps mitigate cost risks for the government. The government's oversight mechanisms, including regular performance reviews and the ability to enforce contract terms and penalties, serve as key mitigation tools. The contractor's own risk management plan, including contingency planning for staffing and operations, is also critical. The presence of multiple bidders in the initial competition suggests a market capable of providing alternatives if performance issues arise.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: HSCEDM-09-R-00008

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5502 BURNHAM DR, CORPUS CHRISTI, TX, 78413

Business Categories: Category Business, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $33,216,731

Exercised Options: $33,216,731

Current Obligation: $33,216,731

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSCEDM09D00001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline