VA's $14.4M relocation services contract with BGRS awarded without competition, raising value-for-money questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,366,604 ($14.4M)

Contractor: Bgrs Relocation Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Start Date: 2008-03-23

End Date: 2010-09-30

Contract Duration: 921 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: NOT REPORTED

Sector: Other

Official Description: RELOCATION SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: AUSTIN, TRAVIS County, TEXAS, 78744

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Veterans Affairs obligated $14.4 million to BGRS RELOCATION INC for work described as: RELOCATION SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs. 2. Long contract duration (921 days) suggests a need for ongoing services, but lack of competition is a concern. 3. No small business set-aside was applied, indicating potential missed opportunities for smaller firms. 4. The contract falls under the 'Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers' NAICS code, suggesting a focus on property-related relocation support. 5. Spending on relocation services can fluctuate based on personnel movements and agency needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Without competitive bidding, it is difficult to benchmark the value for money on this $14.4 million contract. The absence of competition suggests that the government may not have secured the most favorable pricing. Comparing this to similar relocation services contracts awarded competitively would be necessary to assess if the pricing is in line with market rates. The lack of transparency in pricing due to the sole-source award makes a definitive value assessment challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required services. The lack of competition means there were no other bidders to compare against, which can lead to higher prices and reduced innovation. It also limits the government's ability to explore alternative solutions or pricing structures that might be available through a competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these services due to the absence of competitive pressure. The lack of a competitive process means there was no mechanism to ensure the government received the best possible price for relocation services.

Public Impact

Federal employees relocating for duty are the primary beneficiaries, receiving support for their housing needs. Services likely include assistance with finding housing, managing property sales or rentals, and logistical support during moves. The geographic impact is tied to the locations where VA employees are being relocated, potentially across Texas and other states. Workforce implications include ensuring employee retention and readiness by facilitating smooth transitions during mandatory relocations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potential savings.
Lack of transparency in pricing due to non-competitive award.
Potential for vendor lock-in given the long contract duration and lack of competition.

Positive Signals

Provides essential relocation support to federal employees, aiding workforce mobility.
Contract ensures continuity of services for VA personnel during moves.

Sector Analysis

The relocation services sector involves companies that assist individuals and families with moving, often including real estate transactions, logistical support, and temporary housing. This contract fits within the broader professional services market for government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without competitive data, but agencies often spend significant amounts on relocation to support their workforce, especially for roles requiring frequent moves.

Small Business Impact

This contract did not include a small business set-aside. Given the sole-source nature of the award, there was no opportunity to include subcontracting goals for small businesses. This means that the prime contractor, BGRS Relocation Inc., will likely perform the majority of the work, potentially limiting opportunities for small businesses in the relocation services ecosystem to participate in this federal contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Veterans Affairs' contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be based on the performance standards outlined in the contract. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source award, making it harder for the public to scrutinize the value. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Employee Relocation Services
Government Moving and Relocation Assistance
Real Estate Brokerage Services
Department of Veterans Affairs Administrative Support

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing
Limited transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Veterans Affairs awarded $14.4 million to BGRS RELOCATION INC. RELOCATION SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BGRS RELOCATION INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (Department of Veterans Affairs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-03-23. End: 2010-09-30.

What is the track record of BGRS Relocation Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Veterans Affairs?

BGRS Relocation Inc. has a history of performing relocation services for federal agencies. While specific details on past performance with the VA for this particular contract vehicle are not provided in the abbreviated data, agencies typically evaluate a contractor's past performance before awarding sole-source contracts. This often includes assessing their ability to meet deadlines, manage costs, and satisfy customer requirements. A deeper dive into contract databases like FPDS or SAM.gov would reveal the full scope of their federal contract history, including any other agencies they have served and the types of services provided. This information is crucial for understanding their reliability and expertise in fulfilling government relocation needs.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar relocation services contracts awarded competitively?

Direct comparison of pricing is challenging for this contract due to its sole-source nature and the limited data provided. Competitive contracts allow for price benchmarking against multiple bids, revealing market rates for specific services. Without this competitive context, it's difficult to ascertain if the $14.4 million awarded to BGRS Relocation Inc. represents fair market value. To perform a robust comparison, one would need to identify similar relocation contracts awarded by the VA or other agencies during the same period, analyze their scope of work, contract values, and per-unit costs (if available), and then adjust for differences in service levels, geographic scope, and contract duration. The absence of competition inherently raises concerns about potential overpayment.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding a large relocation services contract on a sole-source basis?

The primary risks of a sole-source award for relocation services include a lack of price competition, which can lead to inflated costs for taxpayers. There's also a reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or provide exceptional service, as there are no competitors vying for future business. Furthermore, the government may miss out on potentially better solutions or more cost-effective approaches that could have emerged from a competitive bidding process. Vendor lock-in is another risk; once a sole-source provider is established, it can be difficult and costly to switch vendors in the future, even if performance issues arise or better alternatives become available.

How effective are relocation services in supporting federal workforce mobility and retention for the Department of Veterans Affairs?

Relocation services are generally considered effective in supporting federal workforce mobility and retention by easing the logistical and financial burdens associated with moving. For agencies like the VA, which may require personnel to relocate to serve specific geographic areas or fill critical roles, these services are vital. By providing comprehensive support, such as assistance with home sales, temporary housing, and moving logistics, agencies can encourage employees to accept transfers and reduce the stress of relocation. This, in turn, helps maintain operational continuity, ensures that the VA has the necessary staff in place, and contributes to overall employee satisfaction and retention, particularly in demanding roles.

What has been the historical spending pattern for relocation services by the Department of Veterans Affairs?

Historical spending patterns for relocation services by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) can vary significantly year over year, influenced by factors such as personnel recruitment and retention initiatives, internal reorganizations, and changes in federal relocation policies. While this specific $14.4 million contract spans from March 2008 to September 2010, it represents a portion of the VA's overall expenditure on employee relocation during that period. To understand broader historical trends, one would need to analyze VA's spending data over a longer timeframe, looking at the total obligated amounts for relocation services across all contract vehicles and task orders. This analysis would reveal whether spending has been consistent, increasing, or decreasing, and identify any significant shifts in procurement strategies, such as a move towards or away from sole-source awards.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing › Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers › Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers

Product/Service Code: TRANSPORT, TRAVEL, RELOCATION › RELOCATION OR TRAVEL AGENT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: NOT REPORTED (NO)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Prudential Financial, Inc. (UEI: 018300884)

Address: 1325 G ST NW STE 600, WASHINGTON, DC, 98

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,366,604

Exercised Options: $14,366,604

Current Obligation: $14,366,604

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: V797P0113

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline