HUD awards $26.7M for Field Service Manager services in New Hampshire over 6 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,727,758 ($26.7M)

Contractor: Cityside Management Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development

Start Date: 2010-06-01

End Date: 2016-09-29

Contract Duration: 2,312 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 19

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FIELD SERVICE MANAGER (FSM) M&M III-CONTRACT AREA 2A-1

Place of Performance

Location: MERRIMACK, HILLSBOROUGH County, NEW HAMPSHIRE, 03054

State: New Hampshire Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Housing and Urban Development obligated $26.7 million to CITYSIDE MANAGEMENT CORP for work described as: FIELD SERVICE MANAGER (FSM) M&M III-CONTRACT AREA 2A-1 Key points: 1. Contract awarded for residential property management services. 2. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests predictable costs. 3. Long duration of over 6 years indicates a need for sustained support. 4. Awarded by HUD, a key agency in housing and urban development. 5. The contract was competed under full and open competition. 6. The contractor, Cityside Management Corp, has secured this award.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $26.7 million over approximately six years averages to about $4.45 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for residential property management services is challenging without more specific service details and geographic scope. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty for the government, which is a positive indicator of value. The absence of detailed performance metrics in the provided data makes a definitive value assessment difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 19 bids suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of solutions, benefiting the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.

Public Impact

Residents in New Hampshire benefit from managed residential properties. Services include residential property management, ensuring upkeep and tenant relations. The geographic impact is focused on New Hampshire. The contract supports roles such as Field Service Managers, contributing to local employment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration could lead to vendor lock-in if not managed properly.
Potential for scope creep over the 6-year period if not clearly defined.
Reliance on a single contractor for an extended period may reduce flexibility.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process.
Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost predictability.
Multiple bids received indicate market interest and potential for good pricing.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Real Estate and Property Management sector, specifically focusing on residential properties. The federal government is a significant consumer of property management services to maintain its owned or managed housing stock. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific services rendered, such as maintenance, leasing, and tenant services, and the scale of the properties managed.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate if this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting goals. Without this information, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. However, the presence of 19 bidders suggests that a range of companies, potentially including small businesses, had the opportunity to compete.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be defined in the contract terms and conditions, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance data may be less accessible.

Related Government Programs

HUD Public Housing Programs
HUD Housing Choice Vouchers Program
Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Single Family Housing Programs

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may limit flexibility.
Performance metrics not detailed, making value assessment difficult.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded $26.7 million to CITYSIDE MANAGEMENT CORP. FIELD SERVICE MANAGER (FSM) M&M III-CONTRACT AREA 2A-1

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CITYSIDE MANAGEMENT CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development (Department of Housing and Urban Development).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-06-01. End: 2016-09-29.

What is the historical spending pattern for Field Service Manager (FSM) services by HUD in New Hampshire?

Analyzing historical spending for FSM services by HUD in New Hampshire requires access to detailed procurement data over multiple fiscal years. The provided data point represents a single contract award of $26.7 million from 2010 to 2016. To establish a pattern, one would need to aggregate spending on similar contracts within the same geographic region and service category. This would involve searching federal procurement databases for contracts awarded by HUD (or other relevant agencies) for property management, residential management, or field service management in New Hampshire during previous periods. Without this broader dataset, it's impossible to determine if this $26.7 million award represents an increase, decrease, or consistent level of spending for such services in the state.

How does the per-unit cost of managing a residential unit under this contract compare to industry benchmarks?

Determining the per-unit cost requires knowing the number of residential units managed under this contract and the total contract value allocated to unit management. The provided data includes the total contract value ($26.7M) and duration (approx. 6 years) but lacks the quantity of units. If, for example, the contract managed 5,000 units, the average annual cost per unit would be approximately $890 ($26.7M / 6 years / 5,000 units). Industry benchmarks for residential property management vary significantly based on location, property type (e.g., single-family homes, multi-family apartments), and services included (e.g., leasing, maintenance, accounting). General industry averages can range from $100-$300 per unit per month for full-service management, translating to $1,200-$3,600 annually. Without specific unit counts and service details, a precise comparison is not feasible, but the estimated $890/unit/year might fall within the lower end or below typical full-service management fees, potentially indicating good value if comprehensive services are rendered.

What is the track record of Cityside Management Corp in performing similar federal contracts?

Assessing Cityside Management Corp's track record with federal contracts requires a review of their past performance on similar awards. This involves searching federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) for previous contracts awarded to this entity, particularly those with agencies like HUD or other housing authorities. Key performance indicators to examine would include contract values, durations, types of services rendered, and any reported performance issues, contract modifications, or terminations. A history of successful contract completion, positive performance reviews, and adherence to contract terms would indicate a strong track record. Conversely, a pattern of disputes, unmet performance standards, or contract cancellations would raise concerns. Without direct access to their detailed federal contract history and performance evaluations, a definitive assessment of their track record is limited to the information available in public databases.

What specific services are included under the 'Field Service Manager (FSM) M&M III' designation?

The designation 'Field Service Manager (FSM) M&M III' suggests a role focused on the on-site management and oversight of residential properties, likely involving maintenance coordination, property inspections, tenant issue resolution, and ensuring compliance with property standards. The 'M&M' likely refers to 'Maintenance and Management' or a similar operational scope. The 'III' could denote a specific contract vehicle or a phase within a larger program. These services are crucial for maintaining the physical condition of housing units, ensuring tenant satisfaction, and upholding the value of the properties. The scope would typically encompass coordinating repairs, managing vendor services, conducting move-in/move-out inspections, and potentially handling lease administration or eviction processes, all aimed at ensuring the efficient and effective operation of HUD-managed or supported residential assets.

How has HUD's spending on residential property management evolved over the last decade?

To understand HUD's evolving spending on residential property management over the last decade, a comprehensive analysis of its procurement data is necessary. This would involve aggregating all contracts awarded by HUD for property management, maintenance, and related services across all its programs (e.g., public housing, Section 8, FHA-insured properties) over the past 10 years. Trends could be identified by examining the total annual spending, the number of contracts awarded, the average contract value, and the types of services procured. Factors influencing this evolution might include changes in federal housing policy, budget appropriations, the condition of the housing stock, and shifts towards outsourcing versus in-house management. For instance, an increase in spending might reflect greater needs for property upkeep or a strategic decision to rely more on private sector management. Conversely, a decrease could indicate improved efficiency, reduced housing inventory, or budget constraints. The single contract data point provided ($26.7M for 2010-2016) is insufficient to establish such a trend.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing › Activities Related to Real Estate › Residential Property Managers

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 19

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 22 GREELEY ST STE 5, MERRIMACK, NH, 03054

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,279,391

Exercised Options: $26,727,758

Current Obligation: $26,727,758

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline