DHS awards $34.6M for airport screening services at SFB, with 10 bids received

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,613,113 ($34.6M)

Contractor: Trinity Technology Group, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2014-09-30

End Date: 2019-09-29

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $19.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF THIS CONTRACT IS FOR COMPREHENSIVE AIRPORT SCREENING SERVICES AT ORLANDO SANFORD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (SFB).

Place of Performance

Location: SANFORD, SEMINOLE County, FLORIDA, 32773

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $34.6 million to TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC. for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF THIS CONTRACT IS FOR COMPREHENSIVE AIRPORT SCREENING SERVICES AT ORLANDO SANFORD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (SFB). Key points: 1. Contract value of $34.6M over 5 years suggests a significant investment in airport security. 2. Full and open competition indicates a robust bidding process, potentially leading to better pricing. 3. The contract's duration of 1825 days allows for sustained service delivery and potential for contractor efficiency. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor, potentially stabilizing government expenditure. 5. The award to TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC. represents a substantial contract for the company. 6. Security services are critical for public safety and national security operations. 7. The contract's geographic focus on Orlando Sanford International Airport highlights specific security needs. 8. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561612 points to specialized security guard services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $34.6M over five years averages approximately $6.9M annually for comprehensive airport screening services. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for large airports would provide a clearer picture of value for money. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests that the government has negotiated a set price, which can be advantageous if costs are well-managed by the contractor. Without specific per-unit cost data for screening activities, a precise value assessment is challenging, but the competitive bidding process likely contributed to a reasonable price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 10 bids received. This indicates a healthy level of interest and a competitive marketplace for airport screening services. The presence of multiple bidders generally suggests that the government had a good selection of qualified contractors, which can drive down prices and improve service quality through competitive pressures. The solicitation likely included detailed performance requirements that allowed bidders to propose competitive solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process with 10 bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at a fair market price, preventing potential overspending and encouraging cost-efficiency from the winning contractor.

Public Impact

Passengers and staff at Orlando Sanford International Airport benefit from enhanced security screening. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) receives comprehensive security services to ensure airport safety. The contract supports the operational integrity and security posture of a key transportation hub in Florida. The contract likely supports local employment in the Florida region through the contractor's staffing needs.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for service degradation if contractor prioritizes cost-cutting over quality due to fixed-price nature.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical security functions could pose a risk if performance issues arise.
The long contract duration might limit the government's ability to adopt newer, more efficient screening technologies if they emerge.
Ensuring consistent adherence to security protocols across all screening points requires robust oversight.
Potential for unforeseen cost increases if contract scope expands beyond initial fixed-price agreement.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for the government.
Full and open competition with 10 bidders suggests a competitive market and potentially good value.
The contractor's sustained presence over five years can lead to operational efficiencies and expertise.
The contract supports a critical national security function, ensuring public safety.
The defined performance period allows for consistent service delivery.

Sector Analysis

The airport security screening sector is a vital component of the broader transportation and national security industries. This contract falls under security and guard services, a market characterized by labor-intensive operations and stringent regulatory requirements. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is a major procurer of such services across numerous airports nationwide. Spending in this sector is driven by federal mandates for passenger and baggage screening, aiming to mitigate threats to aviation. Comparable contracts exist for other airports, with costs varying based on size, traffic volume, and specific security technology deployed.

Small Business Impact

This contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate a specific small business set-aside. The prime contractor, TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC., is not identified as a small business in the provided data. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear without further details on subcontracting opportunities or the size status of the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Mechanisms likely include regular performance reviews, site inspections, and adherence to the contract's performance work statement. Accountability is ensured through the firm fixed-price contract terms, where the contractor is responsible for delivering services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific operational oversight details are typically internal.

Related Government Programs

Airport Security Services
Transportation Security Administration Contracts
Department of Homeland Security Procurement
Federal Security Guard Services
Aviation Security Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for service quality degradation under fixed-price contract.
Contract duration may limit adoption of new technologies.
Dependence on contractor for critical security functions.
Need for robust oversight to ensure consistent protocol adherence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $34.6 million to TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC.. IGF::CT::IGF THIS CONTRACT IS FOR COMPREHENSIVE AIRPORT SCREENING SERVICES AT ORLANDO SANFORD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (SFB).

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, 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 $34.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-09-30. End: 2019-09-29.

What is the track record of TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC. in performing similar federal contracts, particularly in airport security?

Assessing the track record of TRINITY TECHNOLOGY GROUP, INC. requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts. While this specific contract is for comprehensive airport screening services, their history may include other security-related or logistical support contracts with government agencies. Information on past performance, including any awards, penalties, or contract terminations, would be crucial. A review of federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) and any available CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) reports would provide insights into their reliability, quality of service, and adherence to contract terms on previous engagements. Without this specific data, it's difficult to definitively assess their suitability beyond the competitive nature of this award.

How does the average annual cost of $6.9M for screening services at SFB compare to similar-sized airports?

The average annual cost of approximately $6.9M for airport screening services at Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB) needs to be benchmarked against airports of similar size and passenger volume to assess value. SFB is considered a medium-sized airport. Costs can vary significantly based on factors such as the number of screening lanes, operating hours, technology employed (e.g., advanced imaging technology), and labor costs in the region. A direct comparison with airports handling a comparable number of passengers annually would reveal if this contract represents a cost-effective solution. Without specific data on passenger throughput and operational scope for SFB and comparable airports, it's challenging to definitively state if $6.9M annually is high or low, but the competitive bidding process suggests it is likely within a reasonable market range.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for airport screening services?

The primary risk associated with a firm fixed-price contract for airport screening services lies in the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or staffing to maintain profitability if their cost projections are inaccurate or if unforeseen operational challenges arise. While the government benefits from cost certainty, the contractor bears the brunt of cost overruns. This could lead to service degradation, reduced vigilance, or employee dissatisfaction if labor costs increase unexpectedly. Another risk is the government's limited flexibility to incorporate new technologies or process improvements mid-contract without potentially incurring additional costs or formal contract modifications. Robust performance monitoring and clear quality standards are essential to mitigate these risks.

How effective are the current screening protocols at SFB in meeting TSA's security objectives?

The effectiveness of the current screening protocols at Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB) in meeting TSA's security objectives is primarily measured through performance metrics outlined in the contract and TSA's own internal assessments. These metrics likely include adherence to standard operating procedures, passenger wait times, detection rates for prohibited items, and compliance with security directives. The contract's duration and the competitive nature of its award suggest a baseline level of expected effectiveness. However, ongoing TSA oversight, audits, and potentially passenger feedback mechanisms are crucial for continuously evaluating and ensuring the protocols meet evolving security threats and objectives. Specific data on detection rates or security incidents would be needed for a precise effectiveness assessment.

What has been the historical spending trend for airport screening services at SFB or similar facilities?

Historical spending trends for airport screening services at SFB or similar facilities would provide context for the current $34.6M award. This contract, spanning from late 2014 to late 2019, represents a significant investment. Analyzing previous contracts for SFB, if any, or comparing the annual average of ~$6.9M to spending at comparable airports over the past decade would reveal patterns. Factors influencing trends include inflation, changes in security mandates (e.g., adoption of new screening technologies), and shifts in passenger volume. Understanding these trends helps determine if current spending is consistent with historical norms, reflects increased security requirements, or indicates potential cost efficiencies or escalations.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: HSTS05-14-R-SPP004

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10687 GASKINS WAY STE 200, MANASSAS, VA, 20109

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $34,863,113

Exercised Options: $34,613,113

Current Obligation: $34,613,113

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline