VSE Corporation awarded $102.8M for 63rd RSC Logistic Support, a sole-source definitive contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $102,761,224 ($102.8M)

Contractor: VSE Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-03-30

End Date: 2020-08-28

Contract Duration: 1,612 days

Daily Burn Rate: $63.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF 63RD RSC LOGISTIC SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: MOFFETT FIELD, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 94035

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $102.8 million to VSE CORPORATION for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF 63RD RSC LOGISTIC SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating clear cost expectations. 2. Duration of over 4 years suggests a significant, ongoing need for services. 3. Awarded by the Department of the Army, highlighting defense-related logistics requirements. 4. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies. 5. Services fall under Facilities Support Services, a broad category with potential for varied execution. 6. VSE Corporation is the sole awardee, suggesting specialized capabilities or a lack of market alternatives.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without comparable sole-source awards for similar logistic support services. The firm-fixed-price structure provides some cost certainty, but the absence of competition prevents a direct comparison to market rates or alternative providers. Without a competitive bidding process, it's difficult to ascertain if the $102.8 million represents optimal value for the services rendered. Further analysis would require understanding the specific deliverables and the contractor's performance history on similar tasks.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not publicly competed. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the necessary capabilities, or in situations where urgency or specific circumstances preclude a competitive process. The lack of competition means there were no other bidders to compare against, limiting the government's ability to leverage market forces for price discovery and potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple offers had been considered.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without competing bids, the government could not be assured of obtaining the most cost-effective solution available in the market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the units and personnel supported by the 63rd Regional Support Command, ensuring operational readiness. Services delivered include essential logistic support, likely encompassing supply chain management, maintenance, and transportation. The geographic impact is concentrated within the operational area of the 63rd RSC, primarily in California. Workforce implications may include direct employment by VSE CORPORATION and potential indirect employment through subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers.
Lack of transparency in the procurement process due to non-competitive nature.
Potential for vendor lock-in given the long-term nature and specialized services.
Performance metrics and quality assurance details are not readily available for this sole-source award.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Long contract duration (over 4 years) suggests a stable and reliable service provider.
Award to VSE CORPORATION indicates a potentially specialized capability meeting a specific government need.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a broad sector encompassing a wide range of services essential for the operation and maintenance of buildings and infrastructure. This contract, valued at over $100 million, represents a significant award within this sector, particularly for defense-related logistics. Comparable spending in this sector can vary widely based on the scope of services, geographic location, and the specific agency's needs. The market for facilities support services is competitive, but sole-source awards like this suggest unique requirements or circumstances.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb: false'. Furthermore, the 'ss: false' flag suggests it was not awarded under the Small Business Administration's various programs. This means that opportunities for small businesses to directly participate as prime contractors were limited. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist, but are not explicitly detailed in the provided data. The overall impact on the small business ecosystem for facilities support services is likely minimal for this specific award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of the Army's contracting officers and potentially the Inspector General's office. Accountability measures are established through the contract terms and conditions, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, making it harder for the public to scrutinize the procurement process and pricing. The Inspector General may conduct audits or investigations if performance issues or allegations of impropriety arise.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Logistics Contracts
Army Facilities Management
Regional Support Command Services
Government Contract Logistics
Facilities Support Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for cost overruns
Limited transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $102.8 million to VSE CORPORATION. IGF::OT::IGF 63RD RSC LOGISTIC SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is VSE CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $102.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-03-30. End: 2020-08-28.

What specific logistic support services are included under this contract?

The provided data categorizes this contract under NAICS code 561210, Facilities Support Services. While the specific details of the '63RD RSC LOGISTIC SUPPORT' are not fully elaborated, this category typically encompasses a wide range of services essential for maintaining and operating facilities and supporting military operations. These can include, but are not limited to, supply chain management, inventory control, transportation and distribution of goods, maintenance and repair of equipment and facilities, waste management, security services, and potentially base operations support. The 'logistic support' aspect suggests a focus on the movement, storage, and provision of resources necessary for the 63rd Regional Support Command's readiness and operational effectiveness.

How does the $102.8 million contract value compare to similar logistic support contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

Direct comparison of this $102.8 million sole-source contract to similar logistic support contracts awarded by the Department of the Army is challenging due to its unique nature. Sole-source awards inherently lack the competitive benchmarking that allows for robust value-for-money assessments against market rates. However, for context, the Department of the Army awards numerous contracts for logistics and facilities support, with values ranging from thousands to billions of dollars. The $102.8 million figure for a multi-year definitive contract suggests a substantial scope of services. Without knowing the specific deliverables and comparing it to other *competitively* awarded contracts for similar scope and duration, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a fair market price. The absence of competition means the government did not benefit from potential cost savings that a bidding process might have yielded.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude?

A sole-source award of this magnitude, $102.8 million, carries several potential risks. Firstly, the lack of competition can lead to reduced price pressure, potentially resulting in the government paying more than it would in a competitive scenario. Secondly, there's a risk of vendor lock-in, where the government becomes heavily reliant on a single provider, making it difficult and costly to switch vendors in the future, even if performance is subpar. Thirdly, without the scrutiny of multiple bidders, there's a higher chance of inadequate performance standards or less innovation compared to a competitive environment. Finally, the justification for a sole-source award needs to be robust; if the justification is weak, it raises concerns about the fairness and efficiency of the procurement process, potentially leading to wasted taxpayer funds.

What is VSE Corporation's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in facilities support and logistics?

VSE Corporation has a significant history of contracting with the Department of Defense (DoD) and other federal agencies, often providing a range of services including logistics, engineering, and technical support. While specific details of their performance on this particular $102.8 million contract for the 63rd RSC Logistic Support are not provided, their broader portfolio includes work on naval systems, aviation, and other defense-related areas. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, including any reported issues, contract modifications, or performance evaluations, would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment. Generally, companies with extensive DoD contracts are familiar with federal acquisition regulations and reporting requirements, but individual contract performance can vary.

How does the contract's duration of 1612 days (approximately 4.4 years) impact the assessment of its value and risk?

The contract's duration of approximately 4.4 years is substantial and has several implications for value and risk. On the positive side, a longer duration can provide stability and continuity of essential services, which is critical for military readiness and operations. It also allows the contractor, VSE Corporation, to amortize startup costs and potentially achieve economies of scale, which could theoretically lead to better value over time. However, a long duration also increases the risk of cost escalation if market conditions change significantly, especially if the contract has provisions for price adjustments. Furthermore, it extends the period of potential vendor lock-in and increases the government's exposure to any performance issues that may arise during the contract term. Regular oversight and performance reviews are essential to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 6348 WALKER LANE, ALEXANDRIA, VA, 22310

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $102,761,224

Exercised Options: $102,761,224

Current Obligation: $102,761,224

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline