DoD's $155M Facilities Support Services Contract Awarded to PRIDE INDUSTRIES Shows Limited Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $155,437,317 ($155.4M)

Contractor: Pride Industries

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-09-01

End Date: 2013-03-29

Contract Duration: 2,036 days

Daily Burn Rate: $76.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: INSTALLATION LEVEL MAINTENANCE CONTRACT

Place of Performance

Location: FORT BLISS, EL PASO County, TEXAS, 79916

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $155.4 million to PRIDE INDUSTRIES for work described as: INSTALLATION LEVEL MAINTENANCE CONTRACT Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating defined cost expectations. 2. The contract duration of 2036 days (approx. 5.6 years) suggests a long-term need for these services. 3. Awarded by the Department of the Army, this contract falls under a significant federal spending category. 4. The 'Not Available for Competition' status raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market engagement. 5. The contract's value of over $155 million signifies a substantial investment in facilities maintenance. 6. Services are concentrated in Texas, indicating a specific geographic focus for this support.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $155 million contract for facilities support services is challenging without more detailed service breakdowns and comparable contract data. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to control costs. The long duration implies a stable, ongoing need, which can sometimes lead to better pricing through economies of scale if managed effectively. Without specific performance metrics or comparisons to similar contracts, a definitive value-for-money assessment remains difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a 'Not Available for Competition' (NAC) justification, indicating that it was not openly competed. This typically means the agency determined that only one source was capable of fulfilling the requirement. The lack of a competitive bidding process limits the opportunity for price discovery and potentially reduces the pressure on the contractor to offer the most competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there was no opportunity to benefit from a competitive bidding process that could have driven down costs. The agency relied on negotiation rather than market forces to set the price.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, receiving essential installation level maintenance and facilities support. Services delivered include a broad range of facilities support, crucial for the operational readiness of military installations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Texas, where the supported installations are located. Workforce implications include the potential for significant employment opportunities for personnel performing these maintenance and support functions, likely within the local Texas economy.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs than a fully competed contract.
Long-term nature of the contract could reduce flexibility to adapt to changing needs or technologies.
Reliance on a single source might create dependency and limit innovation.
Performance monitoring is critical to ensure value is received given the sole-source nature.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the agency.
Long duration suggests a stable and reliable service provider is in place.
Concentration in Texas may support local employment and economic activity.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services, categorized under NAICS code 561210, represent a significant segment of the government contracting market. This sector encompasses a wide array of services, including maintenance, repair, and operational support for government facilities. Federal spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need to maintain a vast inventory of buildings and infrastructure across various agencies. This particular contract, awarded by the Department of the Army, highlights the critical role of private sector support in ensuring the functionality and readiness of military installations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a small business set-aside. However, the prime contractor, PRIDE INDUSTRIES, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, depending on their own subcontracting plans and the nature of the services required. Without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is not detailed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Given the 'Not Available for Competition' status, rigorous performance monitoring and contract administration are crucial to ensure the government receives the intended value. Transparency would be enhanced by public reporting of performance metrics and any modifications to the contract. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

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

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing.
Long contract duration may reduce flexibility.
Performance monitoring is critical for value assurance.
Lack of competition may stifle innovation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $155.4 million to PRIDE INDUSTRIES. INSTALLATION LEVEL MAINTENANCE CONTRACT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PRIDE INDUSTRIES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $155.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-01. End: 2013-03-29.

What is the track record of PRIDE INDUSTRIES in performing similar large-scale facilities support contracts for the Department of Defense?

PRIDE INDUSTRIES has a significant history of providing facilities support services to various government agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their experience often encompasses a broad range of services such as maintenance, repair, custodial, and groundskeeping. For large-scale contracts, their track record would typically be assessed based on past performance evaluations, on-time delivery, adherence to budget, and overall client satisfaction. Specific details on their performance for this particular contract or similar ones would be found in past performance reviews and contract award documents, which are not fully detailed in the provided data. However, their continued ability to secure substantial contracts suggests a generally positive performance history.

How does the $155 million value of this contract compare to other similar facilities support contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

The $155 million value for this installation-level maintenance contract is substantial and falls within the upper range for facilities support services. The Department of the Army manages numerous contracts for base operations and maintenance, with values varying significantly based on the size and scope of the installation, as well as the specific services included. Contracts for major installations or those encompassing a wider array of services (e.g., including utilities management, security, or transportation) can easily reach or exceed this figure. Without a direct comparison of service scope and duration, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a higher or lower cost per service unit, but the overall dollar amount indicates a significant commitment.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding a contract of this magnitude on a sole-source basis?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude include potential overpricing due to the lack of competitive pressure, reduced incentive for innovation from the contractor, and a lack of flexibility if the government's needs change. There's also a risk of contractor complacency or a decline in service quality over the contract's long duration if performance is not rigorously monitored. Furthermore, the absence of competition can create a perception of unfairness and may limit opportunities for other capable companies to demonstrate their services, potentially hindering market development.

How effective has the firm-fixed-price contract type been in managing costs for similar long-term facilities support services within the DoD?

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally favored for services with well-defined scopes and minimal anticipated changes, aiming to provide cost certainty to the government. For long-term facilities support, FFP can be effective in controlling costs if the initial pricing is competitive and the scope is accurately defined. However, the risk shifts to the contractor; if costs escalate unexpectedly due to unforeseen circumstances not covered by contract clauses, the contractor may seek adjustments or potentially reduce service quality to maintain profitability. Effective management requires robust oversight to ensure the contractor is meeting performance standards without cutting corners, especially over extended periods.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services by the Department of the Army, and how does this contract fit within that trend?

The Department of the Army consistently allocates significant portions of its budget to facilities support services, encompassing maintenance, repair, operations, and base support. Historical spending trends show a steady demand for these services, often driven by the need to maintain aging infrastructure and ensure operational readiness across numerous installations. Contracts like this $155 million award are typical within this spending category, reflecting the scale of the Army's real estate portfolio. While specific year-over-year trends fluctuate based on budget allocations and strategic priorities, the overall need for comprehensive facilities support remains a constant, making such large contracts a recurring feature of Army procurement.

What are the implications of the 'Not Available for Competition' status on the potential for cost savings or value optimization?

The 'Not Available for Competition' (NAC) status inherently limits the potential for cost savings that typically arise from a competitive bidding process. When a contract is not competed, the government relies on negotiation and market research to establish a fair price, which may not be as aggressive as prices driven by multiple bidders vying for the contract. This can lead to higher costs for the government compared to what might be achieved through open competition. Value optimization is also potentially constrained, as the lack of competitive proposals means fewer innovative solutions or service delivery models may be considered.

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 AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10030 FOOTHILLS BLVD, ROSEVILLE, CA, 03

Business Categories: AbilityOne Program Participant, Category Business, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $167,165,315

Exercised Options: $161,032,389

Current Obligation: $155,437,317

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline