DoD's $27M Security Systems Contract Awarded to Alutiiq 3SG, LLC for Alaska Operations

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,972,452 ($27.0M)

Contractor: Alutiiq 3SG, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-09-01

End Date: 2016-03-02

Contract Duration: 2,009 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SERVICE

Place of Performance

Location: ANCHORAGE, ANCHORAGE County, ALASKA, 99503

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.0 million to ALUTIIQ 3SG, LLC for work described as: SERVICE Key points: 1. Contract value of $26.97M over its period of performance. 2. Awarded under full and open competition after exclusion of sources. 3. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, indicating potential for cost overruns. 4. Performance period spans from September 2010 to March 2016. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 561621 for Security Systems Services. 6. The contract was awarded to a single vendor, Alutiiq 3SG, LLC. 7. The base contract value was $13.42M, with potential for growth. 8. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Navy.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of approximately $27 million over six years for security systems services appears to be within a reasonable range for large-scale government contracts of this nature. However, without specific benchmarks for security systems services in Alaska or detailed breakdowns of the costs incurred, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type suggests that the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a fixed fee, which can sometimes lead to higher overall costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed carefully. Benchmarking against similar contracts for security systems installation and maintenance for federal facilities would provide a clearer picture of its cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This specific procurement method implies that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were excluded, potentially limiting the pool of bidders. The details of why sources were excluded are not provided, which raises questions about the extent of the competition. A limited competition can sometimes result in less competitive pricing compared to a truly full and open competition where all eligible sources are encouraged to bid.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of certain sources, even within a framework of open competition, may have limited the potential for the most competitive pricing, potentially impacting taxpayer value. Further clarification on the exclusion criteria is needed to fully assess the impact on cost savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of Defense and its personnel stationed in Alaska, who receive enhanced security for their facilities. The services delivered include the provision and maintenance of security systems, contributing to the operational security of military installations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alaska, supporting national defense infrastructure in a strategic region. The contract likely supported jobs in the security services sector, both directly with the prime contractor and potentially through subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can lead to higher costs if not managed stringently.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition method warrants further investigation to ensure maximum taxpayer value.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the security systems provided.
The contract duration of six years might not align with rapidly evolving security technologies.

Positive Signals

Awarded to a single, presumably capable, contractor for a specific need.
The contract addresses critical security needs for Department of Defense operations in Alaska.
The procurement process, despite exclusions, aimed for competitive bidding.

Sector Analysis

The security systems services sector is a critical component of the broader defense and government contracting industry. This contract falls under the NAICS code 561621, which encompasses a range of services from alarm systems installation to security consulting. The market for such services is substantial, driven by government requirements for physical security, access control, and surveillance. Spending in this sector is often influenced by geopolitical events and evolving threat landscapes. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale security system contracts awarded by federal agencies for similar operational environments.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included specific small business set-asides. The prime contractor, Alutiiq 3SG, LLC, is often considered a small business itself, depending on its size standards for the specific industry. However, the contract's value and nature suggest that significant subcontracting opportunities may have been available to other small businesses, particularly in specialized areas of security system installation, maintenance, or support within Alaska. An analysis of subcontracting reports would be necessary to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards, reporting requirements, and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which provide basic award information. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Security Contracts
Federal Security Systems Services
Alaska Federal Procurement
Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
Navy IT and Security Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to CPFF contract type.
Limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources'.
Risk of technological obsolescence over the contract's six-year term.
Lack of detailed performance metrics for assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.0 million to ALUTIIQ 3SG, LLC. SERVICE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALUTIIQ 3SG, 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 $27.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-09-01. End: 2016-03-02.

What is the track record of Alutiiq 3SG, LLC in performing similar security systems contracts for the federal government?

Alutiiq 3SG, LLC has a history of performing various services for the federal government, including those related to logistics, base operations support, and potentially security services. To assess their track record specifically for security systems contracts, a review of their past performance evaluations on similar awards would be necessary. This would involve examining contract performance reports (CPARs) for previous contracts to gauge their timeliness, quality of work, cost control, and overall customer satisfaction. Without direct access to these detailed performance records, it's difficult to provide a definitive assessment of their specific expertise and reliability in this domain beyond the information available in public contract databases.

How does the awarded amount of $26.97 million compare to similar security systems contracts awarded by the Department of the Navy or other federal agencies?

Comparing the $26.97 million award to similar contracts requires identifying comparable procurements based on service type (security systems), scope (installation, maintenance, integration), duration, and geographic location. Large-scale security system contracts for federal facilities can range widely, from a few million to tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the complexity and scale of the installation. For instance, contracts for securing major military bases or sensitive government buildings often involve significant investment. Without specific data on comparable contracts awarded by the Navy or other agencies for similar security systems services in comparable environments (e.g., remote or high-security locations), it's challenging to definitively benchmark this contract's value. However, for a six-year period, $27 million suggests a substantial, ongoing security support requirement.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for security systems services?

The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for security systems services is the potential for cost overruns. In a CPFF structure, the government agrees to pay the contractor's actual costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While the fee is fixed, the total cost is variable. If the contractor's costs escalate due to unforeseen issues, inefficient management, or scope creep, the total contract value can increase significantly beyond initial estimates. This shifts much of the cost risk to the government. For security systems, risks could include unexpected installation challenges in remote locations, the need for specialized equipment, or evolving security requirements that necessitate additional spending. Effective oversight and robust cost controls by the government are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the 'exclusion of sources' in the contract's competition method imply for price discovery and potential savings?

The 'exclusion of sources' in the contract's competition method implies that the competition, while intended to be open, was not fully open to all potential bidders. This means that certain companies or types of companies were deliberately prevented from bidding. The implications for price discovery are that the range of prices submitted might be narrower than in a truly full and open competition. If the excluded sources could have offered competitive pricing or innovative solutions, their absence could lead to a less competitive outcome. This might result in higher prices for the government than could have been achieved if all eligible sources had participated. The specific reasons for exclusion are critical to understanding the extent of this impact on taxpayer value and ensuring fair competition.

How has federal spending on security systems services (NAICS 561621) trended over the past decade, and where does this contract fit within that trend?

Federal spending on security systems services (NAICS 561621) has generally seen a consistent demand over the past decade, driven by ongoing security needs across various government agencies, particularly the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, and others managing sensitive facilities. While specific aggregate spending figures for this NAICS code fluctuate annually based on agency budgets and evolving threats, the overall trend indicates sustained investment in physical security, access control, surveillance, and alarm systems. This $27 million contract, awarded between 2010 and 2016, represents a significant, albeit specific, investment within this broader spending category during that period. It aligns with the government's continuous efforts to maintain and upgrade security infrastructure at its installations.

What are the potential implications of awarding a six-year contract for security systems in terms of technological obsolescence?

Awarding a six-year contract for security systems carries the inherent risk of technological obsolescence. The security technology landscape evolves rapidly, with advancements in areas like AI-powered surveillance, biometric access, cybersecurity integration, and advanced sensor technology occurring frequently. A contract spanning six years might lock the government into using systems or technologies that become outdated or less effective before the contract term ends. To mitigate this, contracts often include provisions for technology refresh, upgrade clauses, or performance-based requirements that allow for adaptation to newer technologies. Without such clauses, the government might be paying for systems that are no longer state-of-the-art, potentially impacting overall security effectiveness and requiring costly upgrades outside the original contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Systems Services (except Locksmiths)

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N0017410R0009

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Afognak Native Corp (UEI: 052089695)

Address: 3909 ARCTIC BLVD, STE 400, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $40,419,836

Exercised Options: $40,419,836

Current Obligation: $26,972,452

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline