State Department's $16.3M long-lead item contract with Brown & Root Services saw administrative correction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $16,274,831 ($16.3M)

Contractor: Brown & Root Services

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 1999-08-19

End Date: 2009-11-18

Contract Duration: 3,744 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.3K/day

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: BROWN & ROOT SERVICES - SFBOAD99D0016 - TO #O004 - LONG LEAD ITEMS. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION TO CORRECT THE CONVERSION DOCUMENT WHICH ENTERED AN ERRONEOUS TOTAL ON THIS TASK ORDER.

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22209

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $16.3 million to BROWN & ROOT SERVICES for work described as: BROWN & ROOT SERVICES - SFBOAD99D0016 - TO #O004 - LONG LEAD ITEMS. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION TO CORRECT THE CONVERSION DOCUMENT WHICH ENTERED AN ERRONEOUS TOTAL ON THIS TASK ORDER. Key points: 1. Contract value adjusted due to administrative error, not performance. 2. Long-term duration suggests significant project scope. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type shifts risk to contractor. 4. No small business set-aside indicates large prime contractor. 5. Task order modification highlights administrative diligence. 6. Contract awarded in 1999, ending in 2009, spanning a decade.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $16.3 million for long-lead items is difficult to benchmark without knowing the specific items procured. The administrative modification to correct an erroneous total suggests a need for careful financial oversight. The long duration (10 years) implies a substantial, ongoing need for these items, but the lack of detailed performance data makes a value-for-money assessment challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

The provided data does not specify the competition level for this task order. Without information on whether it was competed full and open, limited, or sole-source, it's impossible to assess the dynamics of price discovery or the number of bidders involved. This lack of transparency hinders a complete analysis of the procurement process.

Taxpayer Impact: The level of competition directly impacts taxpayer value; robust competition typically leads to lower prices.

Public Impact

Benefits the Department of State by ensuring availability of critical long-lead items for its operations. Services delivered relate to the procurement and management of specialized equipment or materials. Geographic impact is likely global, supporting State Department facilities and missions worldwide. Workforce implications may involve logistics, procurement specialists, and potentially technical staff for item management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition details prevents assessment of price fairness.
Administrative error in initial total raises questions about initial data accuracy.
Long contract duration without clear performance metrics is a potential risk.

Positive Signals

Administrative modification demonstrates a mechanism for correcting errors.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty to the government.
Long-lead item procurement is essential for complex, long-term projects.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader category of government procurement for operational support and equipment. The 'long-lead items' designation suggests specialized components or systems that require significant manufacturing or delivery time, often critical for large-scale infrastructure, defense, or diplomatic initiatives. Benchmarking is difficult without item specifics, but such procurements are common across agencies requiring extensive planning.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the prime contractor, Brown & Root Services, is a large business. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or actual performance, so the impact on the small business ecosystem cannot be determined from this data alone.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. However, the administrative modification to correct an erroneous total suggests that some level of financial review and correction process was in place. Further investigation into the Department of State's contract management and oversight procedures for task orders of this nature would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment.

Related Government Programs

Department of State Operations Support Contracts
Long-Lead Time Item Procurement
Government Administrative Modifications

Risk Flags

Administrative error in contract value requires scrutiny of initial data entry processes.
Lack of competition details hinders assessment of procurement fairness and value.
Long contract duration necessitates ongoing monitoring for relevance and performance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $16.3 million to BROWN & ROOT SERVICES. BROWN & ROOT SERVICES - SFBOAD99D0016 - TO #O004 - LONG LEAD ITEMS. THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION TO CORRECT THE CONVERSION DOCUMENT WHICH ENTERED AN ERRONEOUS TOTAL ON THIS TASK ORDER.

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 $16.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-08-19. End: 2009-11-18.

What specific 'long-lead items' were procured under this task order, and what was their intended use?

The provided data does not specify the exact 'long-lead items' procured under Task Order #O004. These typically refer to components or equipment with extended manufacturing or delivery lead times, crucial for projects requiring significant upfront planning. For the Department of State, such items could range from specialized communication systems, construction materials for overseas facilities, or unique security equipment. Understanding the specific items would allow for a more precise assessment of their necessity, cost-effectiveness, and strategic importance to the agency's mission.

What was the nature of the 'erroneous total' and the process for its correction?

The data states this was an 'administrative modification to correct the conversion document which entered an erroneous total on this task order.' This implies a clerical or data entry error during the initial processing or conversion of contract information, rather than a change in the scope or value of the goods/services themselves. The correction process, while not detailed, indicates a procedural step taken to ensure the contract's financial records accurately reflected the agreed-upon value. Such administrative corrections are common but highlight the importance of robust data validation within contract management systems.

How did the firm fixed price (FFP) contract type impact the government's financial risk and contractor's performance incentives?

A Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract shifts the majority of the cost risk from the government to the contractor, Brown & Root Services. This means the contractor is obligated to complete the work for the agreed-upon price, regardless of unforeseen cost increases. This provides the government with significant cost certainty. For the contractor, it creates a strong incentive to manage costs efficiently and perform the work effectively to maximize profit. However, FFP contracts can sometimes lead to contractors cutting corners on quality if not adequately monitored, though the long-lead nature of the items might mitigate this risk if quality is paramount.

Given the contract's 1999 award and 2009 completion, what does this long duration imply about the nature of the procurement?

The decade-long duration (3744 days) strongly suggests that the 'long-lead items' were not simple off-the-shelf products but rather complex systems or materials requiring extensive manufacturing, testing, or phased delivery. For the Department of State, this could relate to major infrastructure projects at embassies, long-term deployment of sophisticated technology, or a sustained need for critical, hard-to-source components. Such extended timelines necessitate robust program management and consistent oversight to ensure the project remains on track and the eventual delivery meets evolving requirements.

What is the significance of the 'aw' (Award) value being $16,274,830.80, and how does it relate to the 'br' (Base) value of 4347?

The 'aw' (Award) value of $16,274,830.80 represents the total obligated amount for this task order after the administrative modification. The 'br' (Base) value of 4347 is unclear in its context without further data definitions; it does not appear to be a monetary value. It could potentially represent a quantity, a unit identifier, or a reference number related to the base contract or the items themselves. Without clarification on 'br', its relationship to the award value cannot be definitively established, but the award value itself signifies the total financial commitment made under this specific task order.

Contractor Details

Address: 4100 CLINTON DR, HOUSTON, TX, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $16,274,831

Exercised Options: $16,274,831

Current Obligation: $16,274,831

Timeline