Homeland Security's $55.6M contract for airport security screening services awarded to Firstline Transportation Security, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $55,651,971 ($55.7M)

Contractor: Firstline Transportation Security, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2012-12-31

End Date: 2015-04-30

Contract Duration: 850 days

Daily Burn Rate: $65.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF THE PURPOSE OF THIS AWARD IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SCREENING SERVICES TO KANSAS CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MCI) FOR A BASE PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS WITH THREE TWO MONTH OPTION PERIODS.

Place of Performance

Location: KANSAS CITY, PLATTE County, MISSOURI, 64153

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $55.7 million to FIRSTLINE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY, INC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF THE PURPOSE OF THIS AWARD IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SCREENING SERVICES TO KANSAS CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MCI) FOR A BASE PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS WITH THREE TWO MONTH OPTION PERIODS. Key points: 1. The contract's value of $55.6 million over its potential duration suggests a significant investment in airport security infrastructure. 2. Awarded as a 'not competed' contract, this raises questions about the procurement process and potential missed opportunities for competitive pricing. 3. The cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type may incentivize cost overruns, requiring close monitoring of expenditures. 4. The duration of the contract, including option periods, indicates a long-term need for these security screening services. 5. The specific NAICS code 561612 points to a specialized service within the security guard and patrol industry. 6. The contract's base period of six months with three two-month option periods suggests a phased approach to service delivery or evaluation.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $55.6 million contract is challenging without comparable data for similar airport security screening services. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure, while allowing for flexibility, can lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if not managed diligently. The lack of competition further complicates a direct value assessment, as competitive bidding typically drives down prices. The provided data does not offer specific per-unit cost metrics for comparison.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as 'not competed,' indicating a sole-source procurement. This means that only one vendor, Firstline Transportation Security, Inc., was considered for this award. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for other qualified companies to bid on the contract, which can limit price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without multiple offers, the government could not leverage market forces to secure the most cost-effective solution for these essential security services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are travelers and airport operations at Kansas City International Airport (MCI), who will receive security screening services. The contract ensures the delivery of essential security screening, contributing to the safety and efficiency of air travel. The geographic impact is localized to Kansas City International Airport in Missouri. The contract supports jobs within the security services sector, specifically for personnel providing screening at MCI.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and reduced incentive for cost efficiency.
The 'not competed' award type warrants scrutiny into the justification for bypassing a competitive bidding process.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts can sometimes lead to less cost control compared to fixed-price agreements.

Positive Signals

Ensures essential security screening services are provided, contributing to public safety.
The contract duration suggests a stable provision of services for a defined period.
The award is to a specific company, indicating a clear point of accountability for service delivery.

Sector Analysis

The security services industry is a significant sector within the broader economy, encompassing a wide range of protective services. This contract falls under the 'Security Guards and Patrol Services' category (NAICS 561612). The market for airport security is substantial, driven by regulatory requirements and the need for passenger and baggage screening. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large airport security contracts awarded by the TSA or other government agencies, though direct comparisons are difficult without detailed service scope and pricing information.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not awarded to a small business (ss: false) and does not appear to have a small business set-aside component (sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from this specific award. The absence of small business participation in this large contract may limit opportunities for smaller firms to enter or expand their presence in the airport security screening market.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration (TSA). As a definitive contract, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight mechanisms. Accountability measures would include performance reviews, adherence to contract terms, and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases, though specific performance metrics and detailed cost breakdowns may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

TSA Airport Security Contracts
Federal Security Guard Services
Homeland Security Procurement
Transportation Infrastructure Security

Risk Flags

Sole-source award raises concerns about competition and potential cost efficiencies.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type may increase risk of cost overruns.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in summary data hinders evaluation of service quality.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $55.7 million to FIRSTLINE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY, INC. IGF::CT::IGF THE PURPOSE OF THIS AWARD IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SCREENING SERVICES TO KANSAS CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MCI) FOR A BASE PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS WITH THREE TWO MONTH OPTION PERIODS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FIRSTLINE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $55.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-12-31. End: 2015-04-30.

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

The provided data states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a sole-source award. Without further documentation or justification from the awarding agency (Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration), the specific reasons for bypassing a competitive bidding process remain unclear. Common justifications for sole-source contracts include urgency, lack of available competition, or a unique capability possessed by a single vendor. However, for a service like airport security screening, it is generally expected that multiple vendors would be capable of performing the work, making the 'not competed' status a point of interest for further investigation into the procurement history and rationale.

How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) structure impact the overall value and risk for taxpayers?

A Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) contract reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While this structure can be beneficial when the scope of work is not precisely defined or is subject to change, it carries inherent risks for taxpayers. The government bears the risk of cost overruns, as all legitimate expenses are reimbursed. The fixed fee, however, provides the contractor with a guaranteed profit margin regardless of cost efficiency. This can reduce the contractor's incentive to control costs compared to fixed-price contracts. Effective oversight and stringent cost monitoring by the agency are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure value for money.

What is the historical spending pattern for airport security screening services at MCI or similar airports?

The provided data only details this specific contract awarded in 2012 with an estimated value of $55.6 million. It does not offer historical spending data for airport security screening services at Kansas City International Airport (MCI) or comparable airports. To assess historical spending patterns, one would need to access procurement records for previous contracts at MCI, as well as data from other airports of similar size and traffic volume. Analyzing trends in contract values, durations, and competition levels over time would provide context for the current award and help identify any significant deviations or escalations in spending.

What performance metrics are used to evaluate Firstline Transportation Security, Inc.'s service delivery?

The provided data does not specify the performance metrics or key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate Firstline Transportation Security, Inc. In a contract of this nature, typical performance metrics would likely include adherence to screening protocols, passenger wait times, incident response rates, personnel training compliance, and overall security effectiveness. The contract's terms and conditions, along with any associated Performance Work Statement (PWS), would detail these requirements and the methods for measuring performance. Regular performance reviews by the TSA would be essential to ensure the contractor is meeting all obligations.

Are there any known issues or past performance concerns with Firstline Transportation Security, Inc. regarding federal contracts?

The provided data does not contain information regarding the past performance record or any specific issues encountered with Firstline Transportation Security, Inc. on this or other federal contracts. A comprehensive assessment of contractor track record would require accessing databases like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or reviewing agency-specific performance evaluations. Without this information, it is difficult to ascertain if there are any red flags or commendations related to the contractor's history that might inform the risk assessment of this current award.

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: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: SMS Holdings Corporation (UEI: 122312288)

Address: 4807 ROCKSIDE RD STE 280, CLEVELAND, OH, 44131

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $59,730,752

Exercised Options: $59,730,752

Current Obligation: $55,651,971

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline