DoD awards $8.7M facilities support contract to Akima Facilities Operations LLC for services at Ft. Hunter-Liggett, CA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $8,695,790 ($8.7M)

Contractor: Akima Facilities Operations LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2023-04-05

End Date: 2026-04-04

Contract Duration: 1,095 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: EAGLE 8(A) AWARD FOR LOGISTIC SUPPORT SERVICES AT FT. HUNTER-LIGGETT, CA.

Place of Performance

Location: JOLON, MONTEREY County, CALIFORNIA, 93928

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $8.7 million to AKIMA FACILITIES OPERATIONS LLC for work described as: EAGLE 8(A) AWARD FOR LOGISTIC SUPPORT SERVICES AT FT. HUNTER-LIGGETT, CA. Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a potentially competitive process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF), which can incentivize cost control but requires robust oversight. 3. Duration of 1095 days (3 years) suggests a need for sustained support services. 4. The contract is for Facilities Support Services, a critical component of base operations. 5. The award amount of $8.7 million over three years warrants benchmarking against similar service contracts. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized, suggesting the primary focus was on best value competition.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $8.7 million over three years for facilities support services at a single installation requires careful benchmarking. Without specific details on the scope of services, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the CPFF contract type necessitates close monitoring of costs to ensure they remain reasonable and do not escalate beyond the fixed fee. Comparing this to similar contracts for base operations support at other Army installations would provide a clearer picture of its cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This solicitation method suggests that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources may have been excluded for particular reasons, or the initial exclusion of sources was later lifted. The presence of two bidders indicates some level of competition, but the 'exclusion of sources' clause raises questions about the breadth of the initial competition and whether the most advantageous offers were fully explored.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, despite being 'full and open after exclusion,' may have resulted in a higher price for taxpayers than a truly unrestricted full and open competition with a larger pool of bidders.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel and operations at Ft. Hunter-Liggett, CA, who will receive essential facilities support services. Services delivered include a range of facilities maintenance, operations, and support functions critical for base functionality. The geographic impact is localized to Ft. Hunter-Liggett, California, ensuring the smooth running of this military installation. The contract supports the workforce involved in providing these essential facilities management and operational services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' clause in the competition method warrants further investigation to understand potential limitations on market reach.
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type requires diligent oversight to prevent cost overruns and ensure efficient resource utilization.
Benchmarking the per-unit cost of services against similar contracts is crucial for validating value for money.

Positive Signals

The award was made under a competitive process, indicating that multiple vendors were considered.
The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term need for these services, providing predictability for the contractor and the installation.
The services provided are essential for the operational readiness and functionality of Ft. Hunter-Liggett.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a broad category encompassing maintenance, repair, operations, and management of physical infrastructure. The market for these services is substantial, driven by government and commercial entities requiring upkeep of their facilities. This specific award is for a military installation, a common area for such contracts, and fits within the broader defense spending landscape for base operations and sustainment. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar services at Army or other DoD installations.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. The competition was conducted under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which typically prioritizes best value from a broad range of potential offerors rather than specific small business goals. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses, which could limit opportunities for the small business ecosystem in this specific award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and the designated contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of the Army. Robust oversight is critical for CPFF contracts to monitor costs, ensure adherence to the scope of work, and verify the reasonableness of expenses against the fixed fee. Transparency would be enhanced by public reporting of performance metrics and cost breakdowns, though specific details on these mechanisms are not provided. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support Services
Facilities Maintenance Contracts
Department of Defense Logistics Support
Army Installation Management
Government Facilities Services

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources' clause.
Cost control risks inherent in Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type.
Need for robust performance monitoring and cost oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $8.7 million to AKIMA FACILITIES OPERATIONS LLC. EAGLE 8(A) AWARD FOR LOGISTIC SUPPORT SERVICES AT FT. HUNTER-LIGGETT, CA.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AKIMA FACILITIES OPERATIONS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $8.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-04-05. End: 2026-04-04.

What specific services are included under 'Facilities Support Services' for this contract?

While the provided data categorizes the contract under 'Facilities Support Services' (NAICS 561210), the precise scope of work is not detailed. Typically, these services encompass a broad range of activities necessary for the operation and maintenance of a military installation. This can include, but is not limited to, building maintenance and repair, groundskeeping, custodial services, pest control, waste management, utility management, fire protection, and potentially security services. The specific deliverables and performance standards would be outlined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS), which is not available in the provided data. Understanding the exact services is crucial for assessing value and performance.

How does the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' method impact potential cost savings for the government?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' (FOUCAES) method is a complex solicitation strategy. It implies that the initial solicitation may have had restrictions or exclusions, which were later removed or modified to allow for broader competition. While it aims for a competitive outcome, the 'exclusion of sources' aspect suggests that not all potential offerors may have been considered at some stage. If the exclusion was overly broad or based on criteria that unnecessarily limited the bidder pool, it could potentially lead to less robust competition and, consequently, less favorable pricing for the government compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition. The fact that only two bidders participated further suggests that the breadth of competition might have been constrained.

What are the risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for facilities support?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts present inherent risks, primarily related to cost control and contractor incentive. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with a defined profit margin, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor's allowable costs. This structure can reduce the contractor's incentive to control costs aggressively, as their profit is fixed regardless of the total cost incurred (within allowable limits). The government bears the risk of cost overruns if the contractor's actual costs exceed initial estimates. Effective oversight, detailed cost accounting, and clear performance metrics are essential to mitigate these risks and ensure the government receives good value. For facilities support, where operational demands can fluctuate, diligent monitoring of resource allocation and efficiency is paramount.

How does this contract's value compare to similar facilities support contracts at other military installations?

Without specific details on the scope of services and performance metrics, a direct comparison of this $8.7 million, 3-year contract to similar facilities support contracts is challenging. However, the average annual cost is approximately $2.9 million. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify contracts for comparable installations (similar size, climate, complexity of operations) and analyze their total value, duration, contract type, and the specific services provided. Factors like labor costs in the region, the age and condition of the facilities, and the level of service required (e.g., 24/7 operations vs. standard business hours) significantly influence pricing. A comprehensive analysis would involve querying federal procurement databases for similar contracts and performing a detailed cost-benefit analysis.

What is Akima Facilities Operations LLC's track record with similar government contracts?

Akima Facilities Operations LLC is part of Akima LLC, a company that holds numerous government contracts across various agencies, including the Department of Defense. Akima has a significant presence in providing base operations, facilities management, and logistics support services. Their track record generally includes experience with large-scale contracts requiring comprehensive support for military installations. To assess their specific performance on this particular type of contract, a review of past performance evaluations, contract awards, and any reported issues or successes related to similar facilities support services would be necessary. This would involve examining their history with CPFF contracts and their performance metrics in areas like cost control, timeliness, and quality of service delivery.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W52P1J21R0090

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2553 DULLES VIEW DR STE 700, HERNDON, VA, 20171

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,231,244

Exercised Options: $8,695,790

Current Obligation: $8,695,790

Actual Outlays: $831,307

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W52P1J18G0030

IDV Type: BOA

Timeline