Department of the Army awards $90.5M for Fort Gordon food services, highlighting long-term contract needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $90,453,147 ($90.5M)

Contractor: Georgia Vocational Rehabilitation Agency

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-07-30

End Date: 2019-01-31

Contract Duration: 2,011 days

Daily Burn Rate: $45.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FULL FOOD SERVICE FT GORDON GA DINING FACILITIES

Place of Performance

Location: FORT GORDON, RICHMOND County, GEORGIA, 30905

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $90.5 million to GEORGIA VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AGENCY for work described as: FULL FOOD SERVICE FT GORDON GA DINING FACILITIES Key points: 1. Contract value of $90.5M over its period of performance suggests significant demand for sustained food services. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a structured procurement process. 3. A definitive contract type was used, which can offer flexibility but requires careful management of scope and cost. 4. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract shifts performance risk to the contractor, potentially stabilizing costs for the government. 5. The contract duration of approximately 5.5 years (July 2013 - January 2019) points to the need for stable, long-term service provision. 6. The base contract value of $44.9M suggests significant initial scope, with potential for growth through task orders or modifications.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $90.5M for food services at Fort Gordon appears reasonable given the duration and scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale food service contracts for military installations would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure is generally favorable for cost control when requirements are well-defined. The base award of $44.9M and subsequent modifications leading to the total value suggest a managed approach to scaling services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on pre-defined criteria. The presence of four bidders suggests a competitive environment, which typically aids in achieving fair market prices. The specific exclusion criteria would be key to understanding the full competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process, even with exclusions, generally benefits taxpayers by fostering price discovery and encouraging multiple vendors to offer their best terms.

Public Impact

Service members and personnel at Fort Gordon, Georgia, benefit from consistent and reliable food services. The contract ensures the delivery of essential dining facility operations, contributing to troop morale and readiness. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Gordon, Georgia, supporting the base's operational needs. The contract supports jobs within the food service industry, potentially benefiting local economies in Georgia through employment opportunities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial requirements were not fully defined, given the definitive contract type.
Reliance on a single contractor for a critical service like food provision can create dependency.
Ensuring consistent quality and service levels over the contract's extended period requires robust oversight.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition, even with exclusions, generally leads to better pricing.
The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term relationship beneficial for service continuity.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Food Service Contractors sector, a critical support service for government installations. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 722310 represents 'Food Service Contractors.' Spending in this sector is substantial across government agencies, particularly the Department of Defense, to support personnel. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's value and duration to other large military base food service contracts.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) was false, and there is no explicit mention of small business set-asides. This suggests the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist at the discretion of the prime contractor, but they are not mandated by the contract structure as presented.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the requiring activity at Fort Gordon. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, where the contractor is responsible for delivering services as specified. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics and IG reports would require further investigation.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support Services
Military Dining Facility Management
Government Food Procurement
Logistics and Support Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if modifications were not carefully managed.
Contract performance risk associated with long-term service delivery.
Dependency on a single contractor for essential services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $90.5 million to GEORGIA VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AGENCY. FULL FOOD SERVICE FT GORDON GA DINING FACILITIES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GEORGIA VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AGENCY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $90.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-07-30. End: 2019-01-31.

What was the specific rationale for excluding certain sources in this 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award?

The specific rationale for excluding certain sources in a 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award is typically documented in the contract file. Common reasons include pre-qualification requirements based on technical capabilities, past performance, security clearances, or specific certifications necessary for operating within a military installation. Without access to the detailed procurement documentation, the exact reasons for exclusion remain unknown. However, such clauses are often used to ensure that only capable and vetted vendors participate, potentially streamlining the evaluation process while still maintaining a competitive environment among qualified bidders.

How does the per-meal cost under this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar military installations?

Determining the precise per-meal cost requires detailed breakdowns of the contract's total value against the number of meals served over its duration, which is not fully provided in the summary data. However, the total contract value of $90.5M over approximately 5.5 years suggests a significant operational scale. Industry benchmarks for military food services can vary widely based on location, service level, and specific dietary requirements. Generally, government contracts aim for competitive pricing, but the complexities of military base operations (security, logistics, remote locations) can influence costs. A detailed analysis would compare the calculated average per-meal cost against publicly available data for comparable DoD food service contracts or industry reports on institutional food service pricing.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the contractor's performance throughout the contract's lifecycle?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a food service contract of this nature typically focus on service quality, food safety, timeliness, and customer satisfaction. Specific KPIs might include adherence to nutritional standards, cleanliness of facilities, punctuality of meal service, waste reduction targets, and feedback scores from service members. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that failure to meet these KPIs could result in penalties or non-renewal. While the contract award data doesn't list the specific KPIs, they are usually detailed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and are crucial for ensuring the government receives the expected value and quality of service.

What is the historical spending trend for food services at Fort Gordon, and how does this contract fit within that pattern?

The provided data focuses on a single contract awarded in 2013 with a total value of $90.5M. To understand historical spending trends, one would need to examine food service contracts at Fort Gordon over a longer period, perhaps the preceding 5-10 years and subsequent periods. This contract represents a significant investment, suggesting a consistent need for comprehensive food services at the installation. If previous contracts were of similar magnitude and duration, it indicates a stable, long-term requirement. Conversely, if this contract is substantially larger or longer than previous ones, it might signal an expansion of services or a change in procurement strategy. Analyzing prior contract values, durations, and competition levels would reveal the pattern.

Were there any significant contract modifications or change orders issued during the performance period, and what was their impact?

The total award amount of $90,453,146.67 significantly exceeds the base contract value of $44,979,000, indicating substantial modifications or task orders were issued during the contract's performance period (July 30, 2013 - January 31, 2019). These modifications likely adjusted the scope of work, extended the period of performance, or incorporated additional services. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests that modifications would primarily be for changes in quantity or scope rather than cost adjustments, unless specific clauses allowed for it. Understanding the nature and cumulative impact of these modifications is crucial for assessing the contract's evolution and final value realization.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Accommodation and Food Services › Special Food Services › Food Service Contractors

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9124912R0004

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: State of Georgia (UEI: 069230183)

Address: 5238 ROYAL WOODS, TUCKER, GA, 30084

Business Categories: Category Business, Government, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business, U.S. Regional/State Government, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $103,908,277

Exercised Options: $101,970,088

Current Obligation: $90,453,147

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline