State Department contract for services awarded to Brown & Root Services for over $18 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,133,906 ($18.1M)

Contractor: Brown & Root Services

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2003-12-01

End Date: 2009-11-18

Contract Duration: 2,179 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FUNDING MODIFICATION

Place of Performance

Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77020

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $18.1 million to BROWN & ROOT SERVICES for work described as: FUNDING MODIFICATION Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of nearly 6 years indicates a significant, long-term service requirement. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government. 4. The award was made to a single contractor, Brown & Root Services. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of State, indicating a need for support services within the agency. 6. The contract was awarded in Texas, suggesting a geographic focus for the services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific service details or comparable contract data. The firm fixed price structure provides cost certainty, but the total value of over $18 million over nearly six years requires scrutiny to ensure it aligns with market rates for the services rendered. Without knowing the specific services provided, it's difficult to assess if this represents good value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 11 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this contract. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down prices and encouraged innovative solutions from bidders.

Public Impact

The Department of State benefits from the provision of essential services, likely supporting its operational functions. The contract's duration suggests a sustained need for these services, contributing to the agency's stability. Services are likely delivered within Texas, impacting the local economy and workforce in that region. The contract supports the operational infrastructure of a key federal agency.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific service details makes it difficult to fully assess performance and value.
The significant dollar amount over a long period warrants ongoing monitoring for cost efficiency.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition with multiple bidders.
Firm Fixed Price contract type offers cost predictability.
Long contract duration suggests a stable and ongoing need for services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broad category of government services, likely encompassing support functions for the Department of State. Such contracts are common across federal agencies and can range from facilities management to administrative support. The market for government services is large and competitive, with many firms specializing in providing these types of solutions to public sector clients.

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 impact on the small business ecosystem. Typically, larger contracts may have provisions for small business participation, but this is not guaranteed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officers and program managers within the Department of State. Accountability measures would be tied to the performance standards outlined in the contract. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Department of State Operations Support
Federal Service Contracts
Government Facilities Management
Administrative Support Services

Risk Flags

Lack of specific service details
Potential for cost creep over long duration
Need for ongoing performance monitoring

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $18.1 million to BROWN & ROOT SERVICES. FUNDING MODIFICATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BROWN & ROOT SERVICES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-12-01. End: 2009-11-18.

What specific services were provided under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact services rendered under this contract. However, given the contractor's background in services and the awarding agency (Department of State), it likely involved support functions such as facilities maintenance, logistics, administrative support, or potentially security-related services. Without more detailed contract documentation, the precise nature of the services remains unknown. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work would be necessary to ascertain the specific deliverables.

How does the per-unit cost of services compare to market rates?

A per-unit cost comparison is not feasible with the current data. The contract is a 'Firm Fixed Price' award, meaning a total price was agreed upon for a defined scope of work. To benchmark per-unit costs, we would need to know the specific units of service (e.g., cost per square foot for maintenance, cost per hour for administrative support) and compare them to industry benchmarks for similar services provided to government or commercial clients. The total value of over $18 million over nearly six years provides an average annual spend of approximately $3 million, but this does not translate directly to per-unit analysis without service details.

What is the track record of Brown & Root Services with the Department of State and other federal agencies?

Brown & Root Services has a history of contracting with various U.S. federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and others requiring large-scale support services. Their track record often involves complex logistical and facilities management contracts. For the Department of State specifically, this contract represents a significant award. A comprehensive review of their past performance, including any past performance evaluations, disputes, or contract terminations, would be necessary to fully assess their reliability and effectiveness in fulfilling government obligations.

How does the total contract value compare to similar service contracts awarded by the Department of State?

The total contract value of over $18 million over nearly six years is substantial, averaging around $3 million annually. This places it as a significant contract, but not necessarily an outlier for a federal agency like the Department of State, which often requires extensive support services. To make a direct comparison, one would need to analyze other Department of State contracts for similar types of services (e.g., facilities management, base operations support) awarded around the same period or more recently, considering contract duration and scope. Without that comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents high or low spending relative to peers.

What are the potential risks associated with a long-term, high-value service contract like this?

Long-term, high-value service contracts carry several potential risks. These include scope creep, where the requirements expand beyond the original agreement, leading to cost overruns. There's also the risk of contractor performance degradation over time, especially if incentives for efficiency diminish. Vendor lock-in can occur, making it difficult to switch providers even if performance is subpar. Furthermore, changes in agency needs or budget constraints could render the contract less relevant or affordable. Robust oversight, clear performance metrics, and contingency planning are crucial to mitigate these risks.

Were there any performance issues or disputes reported during the life of this contract?

The provided data summary does not contain information regarding performance issues or disputes related to this specific contract. Such details are typically found in contract performance reports, agency inspection records, or legal filings, which are not included in this dataset. To determine if there were any problems, one would need to access more detailed contract administration files or agency Inspector General reports pertaining to this award.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 4100 CLINTON DR, HOUSTON, TX, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,133,906

Exercised Options: $18,133,906

Current Obligation: $18,133,906

Timeline