APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES awarded $86M for facilities support services by the Army, with 3 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $86,060,080 ($86.1M)

Contractor: Aptim Federal Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-08-01

End Date: 2026-01-31

Contract Duration: 1,279 days

Daily Burn Rate: $67.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: USACE RMMR POJ, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL LABOR, MANAGEMENT, SUPERVISION, QUALITY CONTROL, TRANSPORTATION, SUPPLIES, VEHICLES, TOOLS, MATERIALS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND INCIDENTALS NECESSARY TO CONDUCT THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THE PWS.

Place of Performance

Location: BATON ROUGE, EAST BATON ROUGE County, LOUISIANA, 70809

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $86.1 million to APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES, LLC for work described as: USACE RMMR POJ, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL LABOR, MANAGEMENT, SUPERVISION, QUALITY CONTROL, TRANSPORTATION, SUPPLIES, VEHICLES, TOOLS, MATERIALS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND INCIDENTALS NECESSARY TO CONDUCT THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THE PWS. Key points: 1. The contract's firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the Army's facilities support needs. 2. With 3 bidders, the competition level suggests a moderately competitive environment for this service. 3. The duration of over three years indicates a significant, long-term requirement for facilities maintenance. 4. The contract is a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted for small business participation. 6. The geographic focus on Louisiana (LA) indicates a localized operational area for these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $86 million over approximately 3.5 years for comprehensive facilities support services appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale facilities support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense suggests that APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES' pricing is likely competitive. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type provides cost certainty for the government, reducing the risk of cost overruns compared to cost-reimbursement contracts. However, a detailed cost breakdown and comparison to industry standards for specific services would be needed for a more precise value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. With three bidders participating, the competition level was moderate. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, three offers suggest sufficient market interest and a reasonable degree of price discovery. The government likely received competitive proposals, but the specific pricing strategies and profit margins would require further analysis to fully assess.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders is beneficial for taxpayers, as it encourages competitive pricing and ensures the government is obtaining services at a fair market value. This approach helps prevent inflated costs that might arise from less competitive or sole-source procurements.

Public Impact

The U.S. Army benefits from comprehensive facilities support services, ensuring operational readiness and infrastructure maintenance. Services delivered likely include maintenance, repair, operations, and potentially management of various Army facilities. The geographic impact is concentrated in Louisiana, supporting Army installations and operations within that state. The contract supports a workforce involved in facilities management, maintenance, and related trades, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in Louisiana.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if the PWS is not tightly managed, leading to cost increases.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical facilities support could pose a risk if performance issues arise.
The firm-fixed-price nature might disincentivize contractors from proactively identifying cost-saving efficiencies if not structured with performance incentives.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process, likely resulting in fair market pricing.
Long-term contract duration allows for stable planning and execution of facilities support services.
Delivery order structure implies it's part of a potentially pre-vetted IDIQ, suggesting some level of initial vetting.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services fall under the broader Facilities Support and Maintenance industry, a significant segment of the commercial and government services market. This sector encompasses a wide range of activities, including building operations, maintenance, repair, custodial services, and groundskeeping. Government spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need to maintain extensive real property portfolios. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot for similar services across different government agencies and geographic regions.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the data indicates no specific small business participation goals were met through this award. This suggests that larger businesses were the primary focus or most competitive bidders for this requirement. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses, which could be a missed opportunity to engage the small business ecosystem. Future analysis could explore if subcontracting opportunities exist within the prime contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting and program management offices. Performance monitoring, quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs), and regular progress reviews are standard mechanisms to ensure contractor compliance and service delivery. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support (BOS)
Logistics and Supply Chain Management
Real Property Maintenance
Installation Support Contracts
Facilities Engineering Services

Risk Flags

Potential for performance issues due to contract complexity.
Risk of cost overruns if scope is not tightly managed.
Limited small business participation opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $86.1 million to APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES, LLC. USACE RMMR POJ, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL LABOR, MANAGEMENT, SUPERVISION, QUALITY CONTROL, TRANSPORTATION, SUPPLIES, VEHICLES, TOOLS, MATERIALS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND INCIDENTALS NECESSARY TO CONDUCT THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THE PWS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES, 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 $86.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-08-01. End: 2026-01-31.

What is APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES' track record with similar large-scale facilities support contracts for the Department of Defense?

APTIM FEDERAL SERVICES has a history of performing large-scale government contracts, including significant work in facilities support, base operations, and environmental services for various federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their experience often involves managing complex operations across multiple sites and ensuring compliance with stringent government requirements. Analyzing their past performance ratings, any contract disputes, or awards for similar services can provide insight into their capability and reliability. For instance, reviewing their performance on previous Army or other DoD contracts of similar scope and value would be crucial. Data from contract databases often includes past performance information, which can highlight successes and areas for improvement, helping to contextualize the current award.

How does the awarded price compare to industry benchmarks for facilities support services in Louisiana?

To benchmark the $86 million contract value against industry standards for facilities support services in Louisiana, one would typically analyze cost per square foot, cost per facility, or cost per service type (e.g., HVAC maintenance, janitorial services). Industry reports from organizations like IFMA (International Facility Management Association) or specific market research firms can provide average costs. Given the contract's broad scope, a direct comparison is challenging without a detailed breakdown of services. However, the firm-fixed-price nature suggests the government sought predictable costs. If the average cost per square foot or per service unit falls within or below the typical range for commercial or government facilities in the region, it indicates good value. Conversely, if it significantly exceeds benchmarks, it might warrant further investigation into the necessity of specific services or the efficiency of the contractor's operations.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract for facilities support?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract for facilities support is the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or service scope to maximize profit, especially if unforeseen issues arise or costs increase beyond initial estimates. This can lead to reduced service levels, deferred maintenance, or inadequate repairs. Another risk is that the government may pay a premium for this cost certainty, as contractors typically build in contingency for unknown risks. If the scope of work is not meticulously defined and managed, scope creep can occur, leading to disputes or the need for costly change orders. Furthermore, if the contractor experiences significant cost increases due to external factors (e.g., labor shortages, material price hikes), their financial viability could be strained, potentially impacting service delivery.

How effective are the current oversight mechanisms in ensuring the Army receives adequate facilities support in Louisiana?

The effectiveness of oversight mechanisms hinges on their diligent application. Standard oversight for such contracts includes Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans (QASPs), regular performance reviews, site inspections, and clear communication channels between the government and the contractor. The Department of the Army typically employs experienced contracting officers' representatives (CORs) to monitor performance. For this contract, the effectiveness would depend on the COR's resources, expertise, and the rigor with which they execute surveillance tasks. Transparency through reporting and the potential for Inspector General (IG) audits provides further accountability. However, the sheer scale and duration of such contracts can strain oversight resources, making proactive identification and resolution of issues critical.

What is the historical spending trend for facilities support services by the Department of the Army in Louisiana?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities support services by the Department of the Army in Louisiana requires access to detailed procurement data over several fiscal years. This would involve identifying all contracts awarded for similar services (e.g., base operations, facilities maintenance, repair, and operations) to various contractors within the state. Trends might reveal an increasing or decreasing reliance on contracted services, shifts in contract types (e.g., from FFP to cost-plus), or changes in average contract values. Understanding these patterns can help determine if the current $86 million award represents a significant increase or decrease in spending, potentially indicating changes in mission requirements, infrastructure needs, or contracting strategies within the Army's Louisiana footprint.

What are the implications of this contract being a delivery order under an IDIQ vehicle?

This contract being a delivery order (DO) under an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle means that the underlying IDIQ contract likely established pre-negotiated terms, conditions, and potentially labor rates or CLIN structures. The IDIQ vehicle itself would have undergone a competitive process, but each subsequent delivery order, like this one, may have varying levels of competition or be awarded based on established pricing. This structure allows for flexibility and rapid procurement of services as needed. For taxpayers, it can offer efficiencies if the IDIQ competition was robust. However, it's crucial that each DO is still competed appropriately or justified if awarded sole-source, and that the total value of all DOs does not exceed the IDIQ ceiling. The specific IDIQ vehicle used here would provide further context on its original competition and scope.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W912DY21R0055

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Peraton Technology Services Inc.

Address: 1200 BRICKYARD LANE, SUITE 202, BATON ROUGE, LA, 70802

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $86,800,254

Exercised Options: $86,800,254

Current Obligation: $86,060,080

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 31

Total Subaward Amount: $1,903,435

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QSHA18D000Z

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline