FEMA's $39M Katrina housing task order to Shaw Environmental, Inc. for Louisiana temporary housing solutions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $39,268,166 ($39.3M)

Contractor: Shaw Environmental, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2005-09-10

End Date: 2006-10-31

Contract Duration: 416 days

Daily Burn Rate: $94.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SUPPORT; IDENTIFY POTENTIAL TEMPORARY HOUSING SOLUTIONS, RESOURCES, AND REQUIREMENT IN LOUISIANA FOR PEOPLE DISPLACED AS A RESULT OF HURRICANE KATRINA, TO INCL. INSTALL TRAVEL TRAILERS AND MOBILE HOMES, MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR TT AND MH, GROUNDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE GROUP SITE UNDER THIS TASK ORDER, ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN MAINTENANCE LOGS FOR EVERY STRUCTURE INSTALLED/PREPARED

Place of Performance

Location: BATON ROUGE, EAST BATON ROUGE County, LOUISIANA, 70821

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $39.3 million to SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. for work described as: SUPPORT; IDENTIFY POTENTIAL TEMPORARY HOUSING SOLUTIONS, RESOURCES, AND REQUIREMENT IN LOUISIANA FOR PEOPLE DISPLACED AS A RESULT OF HURRICANE KATRINA, TO INCL. INSTALL TRAVEL TRAILERS AND MOBILE HOMES, MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR TT AND MH, GROUNDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE SE… Key points: 1. Value for money is difficult to assess due to the emergency nature of the contract and lack of comparable data. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a sole-source award, potentially limiting price discovery and increasing costs. 3. Risk indicators include the emergency response context and the extended duration of the task order. 4. Performance context is tied to disaster relief efforts following Hurricane Katrina. 5. Sector positioning is within professional, scientific, and technical services, specifically disaster recovery and support.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value is challenging to benchmark given its emergency response nature following Hurricane Katrina. As a sole-source award, direct comparisons to competitively bid contracts are not feasible. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure means that while direct costs are reimbursed, the fixed fee is negotiated, and its reasonableness is key to overall value. Without detailed cost breakdowns and market analysis at the time, assessing true value-for-money is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a sole-source delivery order, meaning it was not competed. This approach is often used in emergency situations where a specific contractor's capabilities are deemed essential or time is of the essence. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for multiple vendors to bid, which could have led to lower prices through a competitive bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. The government relies on negotiation and oversight to ensure a fair price.

Public Impact

Individuals and families displaced by Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana benefited from the provision of temporary housing solutions. Services delivered included the installation and maintenance of travel trailers and mobile homes, as well as grounds and infrastructure maintenance for group sites. The geographic impact was concentrated in Louisiana, specifically addressing the needs of those affected by the hurricane. The contract supported a significant effort in disaster recovery, impacting the workforce involved in installation, maintenance, and support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Emergency nature of the contract may have led to less rigorous cost scrutiny.
Extended duration of the task order (over a year) could indicate unforeseen complexities or scope creep.

Positive Signals

Addressed critical, immediate needs for housing displaced populations.
Shaw Environmental, Inc. was tasked with providing essential services during a major disaster.
The contract aimed to provide a comprehensive solution including installation and ongoing maintenance.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services sector, specifically related to disaster recovery and support. The market for such services is often characterized by rapid mobilization and specialized expertise required during emergencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique and urgent nature of disaster relief contracting, which often necessitates sole-source or emergency procurement methods.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, nor is there explicit information regarding subcontracting to small businesses. The award to a single large entity like Shaw Environmental, Inc. suggests that small business participation may have been limited unless they were subcontractors to the prime. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business involvement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a component of the Department of Homeland Security. Given the cost-plus-fixed-fee structure and the emergency context, oversight would focus on the allowability of costs, the reasonableness of the fixed fee, and the satisfactory performance of services. Transparency is typically enhanced through contract reporting mechanisms, though specific oversight reports for this individual task order may not be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Hurricane Katrina Disaster Relief Efforts
Temporary Housing Programs
FEMA Disaster Assistance Contracts
Emergency Procurement
Post-Disaster Infrastructure Support

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Emergency procurement context
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $39.3 million to SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.. SUPPORT; IDENTIFY POTENTIAL TEMPORARY HOUSING SOLUTIONS, RESOURCES, AND REQUIREMENT IN LOUISIANA FOR PEOPLE DISPLACED AS A RESULT OF HURRICANE KATRINA, TO INCL. INSTALL TRAVEL TRAILERS AND MOBILE HOMES, MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR TT AND MH, GROUNDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE GROUP SITE UNDER THIS TASK ORDER, ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN MAINTENANCE LOGS FOR EVERY STRUCTURE INSTALLED/PREPARED

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $39.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-09-10. End: 2006-10-31.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The justification for a sole-source award typically stems from urgent and compelling circumstances, such as a natural disaster where immediate action is required to protect life and property. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, the widespread devastation necessitated rapid deployment of resources. FEMA likely determined that Shaw Environmental, Inc. possessed the unique capabilities, existing infrastructure, or was the most readily available entity to provide the critical temporary housing solutions and associated services in Louisiana within the required timeframe. Sole-source awards bypass the standard competitive bidding process to expedite critical support during emergencies, though they require thorough documentation of the necessity.

How did the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) structure impact the final cost to taxpayers?

The Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) structure reimburses the contractor for all allowable direct and indirect costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee. For taxpayers, this means the government covers the actual costs of performing the work, which can fluctuate. The fixed fee represents the contractor's profit and is negotiated upfront. While the fee itself doesn't change, the total cost to taxpayers is directly tied to the total allowable costs incurred by Shaw Environmental, Inc. This structure can incentivize contractors to control costs to maximize their profit margin on the fixed fee, but it also carries the risk that actual costs could be higher than anticipated, leading to a higher overall expenditure than a fixed-price contract might have.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for Shaw Environmental, Inc. under this task order?

While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, typical performance indicators for such a contract would likely include the timely installation of travel trailers and mobile homes, the quality and responsiveness of maintenance services for these units and grounds, adherence to safety protocols during installation and maintenance, and effective management of resources and personnel. Meeting the demand for temporary housing solutions for displaced individuals and families in Louisiana would be a primary objective. Performance would also be assessed against the established schedule and budget parameters, with FEMA monitoring progress and addressing any deficiencies.

Were there any challenges or issues encountered during the performance of this contract?

Given the scale and complexity of the Hurricane Katrina disaster response, it is highly probable that challenges were encountered. These could have included logistical difficulties in transporting and installing housing units across affected areas, unforeseen infrastructure issues at group sites, supply chain disruptions for materials, and the sheer volume of demand for services. Managing a large workforce in a disaster zone also presents significant challenges. While specific issues are not detailed here, the extended duration of the task order (over a year) might suggest that the initial scope or timeline required adjustments due to such challenges.

How does this contract compare to other federal disaster response contracts in terms of scope and value?

This contract, valued at approximately $39 million for temporary housing solutions in Louisiana following Hurricane Katrina, represents a significant federal response to a major disaster. Its scope encompassed installation, maintenance, and infrastructure support, indicating a comprehensive approach. Compared to other disaster response contracts, its value is substantial, reflecting the immense scale of the Katrina disaster. However, direct comparisons are complex as disaster impacts vary widely, influencing contract scope, duration, and cost. Contracts for different types of disasters (e.g., earthquakes, floods) or different phases of response (e.g., immediate relief vs. long-term recovery) would naturally differ in their specifics.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: HSFEHQ05R0046

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. (UEI: 386491765)

Address: 1725 DUKE STREET, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22314

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $39,474,102

Exercised Options: $39,474,102

Current Obligation: $39,268,166

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSFEHQ05D0573

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline