DHS awarded $24.4M for guard services, with a single delivery order under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,367,709 ($24.4M)

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

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2005-04-01

End Date: 2006-03-31

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $66.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: GUARD SERVICE

Place of Performance

Location: CORPUS CHRISTI, NUECES County, TEXAS, 78413

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $24.4 million to ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P. for work described as: GUARD SERVICE Key points: 1. The contract utilized a firm-fixed-price structure, which is generally favorable for cost control. 2. Competition was broad, indicating potential for competitive pricing, though the final award was a single delivery order. 3. The contract duration was one year, suggesting a focus on immediate or short-term needs. 4. The award was made to a single entity, ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P. 5. The contract was awarded by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). 6. The primary service category was guard services, a common requirement for federal facilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without more detailed service level agreements and performance metrics. The firm-fixed-price type suggests a defined scope, which can aid in cost predictability. However, the raw dollar amount of $24.4 million for a one-year guard service contract requires comparison against similar contracts for facilities of comparable size and security needs within DHS or other agencies to determine if it represents a competitive price point. Without such context, assessing true value-for-money is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' suggesting that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. However, the data indicates only one delivery order was issued against this contract. This could mean that while the initial competition was broad, only one vendor ultimately met the requirements or was selected for this specific task order. The level of competition for the task order itself is not detailed, but the initial broad competition is a positive indicator for price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple vendors to bid, potentially driving down costs. Even if only one delivery order was issued, the initial broad competition suggests that the government sought the best possible pricing and service.

Public Impact

This contract directly supports the operational security and asset protection needs of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The services provided are essential for maintaining secure federal facilities and ensuring the safety of personnel and assets. The contract's geographic impact is focused on Texas, where the delivery order was placed. The contract likely supported local employment in the security services sector within Texas.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the quality and effectiveness of the guard services provided.
The specific scope of work for the single delivery order is not detailed, making it hard to evaluate if it fully addressed ICE's needs.
Without comparison data, it's challenging to ascertain if the $24.4 million represents optimal value for the services rendered.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded under a full and open competition, indicating a commitment to seeking a wide range of potential providers.
The use of a firm-fixed-price contract type helps to establish clear cost expectations and limits the government's exposure to cost overruns.
The contract was awarded to a single, established vendor, suggesting a potentially reliable provider for the required services.

Sector Analysis

The federal security services market is substantial, encompassing guard services, physical security, and access control. This contract falls within the broader category of professional services, specifically focusing on physical security and personnel. Agencies like DHS and ICE frequently procure such services to protect critical infrastructure, detention facilities, and government buildings. Benchmarking this $24.4 million award would involve comparing it to other large-scale guard service contracts awarded by federal agencies, considering factors like the number of personnel, hours of service, and specific security requirements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary focus was likely on larger, established security firms capable of meeting the extensive requirements of ICE. While there's no explicit mention of subcontracting to small businesses, it's possible that the prime contractor utilized small businesses for certain support functions. However, without specific subcontracting plans or goals, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award is unclear.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), an agency with established oversight mechanisms. Specific oversight for this contract would typically be managed by contracting officers and program managers within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Accountability would be enforced through contract terms, performance reviews, and potential remedies for non-performance. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arose.

Related Government Programs

Federal Protective Service Contracts
Department of Homeland Security Security Services
Immigration and Customs Enforcement Facility Management
Guard Services for Federal Agencies
Asset Protection Contracts

Risk Flags

Single Delivery Order
Limited Performance Data
Lack of Detailed Scope

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $24.4 million to ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P.. GUARD SERVICE

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 $24.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-04-01. End: 2006-03-31.

What was the specific nature of the guard services provided under this contract?

The provided data categorizes this contract under 'GUARD SERVICE' and indicates it was awarded to ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P. by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). While the exact scope of work is not detailed in the summary data, guard services typically encompass a range of security functions such as access control, perimeter security, patrolling, monitoring surveillance systems, and responding to incidents at federal facilities. Given the awarding agency (ICE), these services likely pertained to the security of detention centers, office buildings, or other ICE-managed properties within Texas.

How does the $24.4 million award compare to similar guard service contracts for ICE or DHS?

Direct comparison of the $24.4 million award for a one-year contract is difficult without more specific details on the scope of services, number of personnel, hours, and geographic coverage. However, large federal agencies like DHS and ICE routinely award multi-million dollar contracts for guard services. For instance, other ICE or DHS contracts for similar security needs at facilities of comparable size and risk profile could range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars annually. The firm-fixed-price nature of this contract suggests a defined cost structure, but its value-for-money can only be truly assessed against detailed performance metrics and market benchmarks for comparable security requirements.

What are the potential risks associated with a single delivery order under a full and open competition?

A single delivery order under a full and open competition might indicate that while the initial solicitation attracted broad interest, only one vendor was ultimately selected for this specific task. Potential risks include a lack of ongoing competitive pressure for subsequent task orders if they were to be issued under the same contract vehicle, potentially leading to less favorable pricing over time. It could also suggest that the requirements for this particular order were highly specialized, or that only one bidder fully met all stringent criteria. However, if the initial competition was robust, the government likely secured a competitive price for this specific order.

What is the track record of ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P. with federal contracts?

ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P. has a history of receiving federal contracts, as evidenced by this award from ICE. To fully assess their track record, one would need to examine their contract performance history across all federal agencies. This includes reviewing past awards, contract values, durations, and any reported performance issues or successes. A comprehensive review would look for patterns of on-time delivery, adherence to quality standards, and compliance with contract terms. Information on past performance, including any awards or penalties, is crucial for understanding their reliability as a federal contractor.

What are the implications of the firm-fixed-price contract type for this guard service award?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered advantageous for the government when the scope of work is well-defined and risks of cost overruns are manageable. For guard services, an FFP contract means that the contractor, ASSET PROTECTION & SECURITY SERVICES, L.P., agreed to perform the specified services for a predetermined price. This shifts the risk of cost increases due to labor, materials, or other direct costs to the contractor. It provides budget certainty for ICE and simplifies financial administration. However, it requires careful definition of requirements upfront to avoid scope creep or disputes over what is included in the fixed price.

How does this contract fit within the broader spending patterns for security services at DHS?

This $24.4 million contract for guard services represents a component of the significant overall spending by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on security and protective services. DHS, responsible for national security and border control, relies heavily on contracted security personnel to protect its numerous facilities, including immigration centers, ports of entry, and administrative buildings. Annual spending by DHS on guard and related security services can amount to billions of dollars across its various components like ICE, CBP, and TSA. This specific contract, awarded to ICE in Texas, is one of many such awards that collectively ensure the physical security and operational integrity of DHS assets.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4455 S SPID STE 105A, CORPUS CHRISTI, TX, 78411

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $75,929,289

Exercised Options: $25,744,436

Current Obligation: $24,367,709

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: ACB3C0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline