DoD's $50.4M Engineering Services Contract for Secure Building Maintenance Awarded to KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $50,431,601 ($50.4M)

Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-06-29

End Date: 2024-03-29

Contract Duration: 2,830 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF 12-0003-16 SECURITY MAINTENANCE OF SECURE: BUILDING

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20375

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $50.4 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF 12-0003-16 SECURITY MAINTENANCE OF SECURE: BUILDING Key points: 1. Contract value of $50.4M over 8 years suggests significant long-term investment in facility upkeep. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. Engineering services (NAICS 541330) are critical for maintaining complex government infrastructure. 4. The contract's duration of 2830 days (approx. 7.75 years) points to a need for sustained support. 5. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) may allow for flexibility but requires careful oversight of costs. 6. Geographic location in Washington D.C. (ST: DC) highlights the importance of secure facilities in the capital. 7. The contractor, KBR Wyle Services, LLC, is a significant player in government contracting. 8. The absence of small business set-aside (SS: false, SB: false) means opportunities for smaller firms may be limited.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $50.4 million over approximately 8 years for engineering services related to secure building maintenance appears reasonable given the scope and duration. While specific benchmarks for this niche service are difficult to ascertain without more granular data, the cost-plus-fixed-fee structure allows for adjustments based on actual costs incurred, plus a predetermined fee. This structure, common in complex service contracts, aims to balance contractor incentive with cost control. Benchmarking against similar large-scale facility maintenance contracts for secure government installations would provide a clearer picture of value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders were likely solicited and evaluated. The fact that it was competed openly is a positive indicator for price discovery and potentially achieving a competitive price. The number of bids received and the specific evaluation criteria would further illuminate the effectiveness of the competition. However, without access to the solicitation details and bid tabulation, it's challenging to definitively assess the intensity of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and encourage innovation. It ensures that the government explores a wide range of potential contractors, increasing the likelihood of selecting the best value offer.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its personnel, who rely on secure and well-maintained facilities. The contract delivers essential engineering and maintenance services for secure buildings, ensuring operational readiness and safety. The geographic impact is concentrated in Washington D.C., a critical hub for national security and government operations. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers, technicians, and support staff within the Washington D.C. area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
The long duration of the contract may reduce flexibility to adapt to changing technological needs or security requirements.
Concentration of services in a single geographic area (DC) might limit broader application or learning from other regions.
Lack of small business participation could mean missed opportunities for innovation and economic inclusion.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
The contractor, KBR Wyle Services, LLC, has a significant presence and experience in government contracting.
The contract addresses critical infrastructure needs for secure facilities, vital for national security.
The fixed fee component of the contract provides a degree of cost predictability for the government.

Sector Analysis

The engineering services sector, particularly for government facilities, is a substantial market driven by the need to maintain and upgrade complex infrastructure. NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services) encompasses a wide range of activities, including design, consulting, and project management for various types of facilities. Spending in this sector is often characterized by long-term contracts, especially for defense and secure government installations, where reliability and security are paramount. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within large federal agencies managing extensive real property portfolios, such as the Department of Defense, GSA, and other national security entities.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside (SS: false, SB: false). This means the competition was open to all eligible businesses, including large corporations. While this ensures broad competition, it may limit direct opportunities for small businesses to secure prime contract roles on this specific award. However, the prime contractor, KBR Wyle Services, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill certain aspects of the contract, potentially providing indirect opportunities within the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type necessitates rigorous oversight of incurred costs to ensure they align with the contract's objectives and the fixed fee. Transparency is typically managed through regular reporting requirements from the contractor and periodic reviews by government personnel. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract's execution.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Engineering Services for Secure Facilities
Government Building Operations and Maintenance
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Service Contracts

Risk Flags

Long-term contract duration may limit flexibility.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure requires diligent oversight.
Concentration in a single geographic area.
Potential for cost overruns if not managed effectively.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $50.4 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF 12-0003-16 SECURITY MAINTENANCE OF SECURE: BUILDING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $50.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-06-29. End: 2024-03-29.

What is the track record of KBR Wyle Services, LLC with similar Department of Defense contracts?

KBR Wyle Services, LLC, a subsidiary of KBR, Inc., has a substantial history of performing large-scale engineering, construction, and maintenance services for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. They have been involved in numerous contracts related to base operations, facilities management, and specialized engineering support across various military branches. Their track record often includes managing complex projects in challenging environments, both domestically and internationally. Analyzing their past performance on similar cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, particularly those involving secure facilities maintenance, would provide insight into their ability to manage costs effectively and deliver required services within budget and schedule. Historical data on contract awards and performance ratings from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or agency-specific performance management systems would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the $50.4M contract value compare to similar secure building maintenance contracts?

Benchmarking the $50.4 million contract value requires comparing it to similar contracts for secure building maintenance, specifically within the Washington D.C. area or for comparable high-security federal installations. Factors such as the square footage of facilities maintained, the specific types of security systems and infrastructure involved, the level of specialized engineering expertise required, and the contract duration (approximately 8 years) are critical for a fair comparison. Without access to detailed scope of work and specific performance metrics for comparable contracts, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, given the high cost of operating and maintaining secure facilities in a major metropolitan area like D.C., and the long-term nature of the support, this figure appears to be within a plausible range for a significant, multi-year engineering services contract.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risks associated with a $50.4 million, 8-year Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract revolve around cost control and contractor performance. For the government, the risk is that actual costs incurred by the contractor could significantly exceed initial estimates, even with a fixed fee, potentially leading to a higher overall expenditure than anticipated if oversight is insufficient. The contractor bears the risk of the fixed fee becoming insufficient if costs escalate beyond reasonable expectations, which could incentivize cutting corners on quality or scope. For a contract of this duration, there's also a risk of scope creep, technological obsolescence, or changes in requirements that may not be adequately captured by the initial fixed fee. Robust government oversight, detailed cost accounting, and clear performance metrics are essential to mitigate these risks.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring optimal value for taxpayers on engineering services contracts?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring optimal value for taxpayers on engineering services contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices, encourages innovation, and increases the likelihood of selecting the offer that provides the best overall value (considering price, technical approach, past performance, etc.). This broad competition helps prevent monopolies or limited supplier markets, which can lead to inflated prices. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the clarity of the solicitation, the fairness of the evaluation process, and the actual number and capability of the bidders. For complex engineering services, ensuring that bidders have the requisite technical expertise and capacity is as crucial as the price competition itself.

What are the implications of this contract being awarded in Washington D.C. for national security infrastructure?

Awarding this significant engineering services contract in Washington D.C. has direct implications for national security infrastructure. D.C. hosts numerous critical government facilities, embassies, and command centers that require the highest levels of security, reliability, and maintenance. Ensuring these buildings are expertly maintained and engineered is paramount to the continuous operation of essential government functions and the protection of sensitive information and personnel. The concentration of such contracts in the capital underscores the strategic importance of these facilities and the need for specialized, high-quality services to safeguard national interests. The geographic focus also implies a concentration of skilled labor and resources dedicated to supporting this vital infrastructure.

What is the historical spending pattern for engineering services by the Department of the Navy in the Washington D.C. area?

Historical spending patterns for engineering services by the Department of the Navy (DoN) in the Washington D.C. area are likely substantial, reflecting the significant presence of naval commands, research facilities, and administrative headquarters in the region. The DoN, as part of the DoD, consistently invests in maintaining and upgrading its infrastructure to ensure operational readiness and security. Spending in this category typically includes architectural and engineering design services, construction management, facilities maintenance, and specialized technical support. Analyzing historical data from FPDS or similar databases would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, and prime contractors frequently awarded work. This specific $50.4M contract represents a significant, long-term investment within this broader historical context of DoN's infrastructure support in the D.C. metropolitan area.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N0017315REB04

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: KBR, Inc.

Address: 7000 COLUMBIA GATEWAY DR STE 100, COLUMBIA, MD, 21046

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $51,424,434

Exercised Options: $51,424,434

Current Obligation: $50,431,601

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 33

Total Subaward Amount: $5,395,588

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline