DoD's $11M contract for communication equipment repair awarded to Red River Service Corp. shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,025,761 ($11.0M)

Contractor: RED River Service Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-12-05

End Date: 2007-12-31

Contract Duration: 756 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: 200604!000217!5700!FA8101!OC-ALC/PKO !F3465002D0003 !A!N! !Y!0005 ! !20051205!20060930!025508651!793639196!793639196!N!RED RIVER SERVICE CORPORATION !9304 LEDGESTONE TERRACE !AUSTIN !TX!78737!73800!017!40!TINKER AFB !CANADIAN !OKLAHOMA !+000000579722!N!N!000000000000!J058!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !811213!E! !5!A!S! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !N!Z!A!N!J!2!005!K! !Z!N!Z! ! !Y!B!N!N! ! !A! !B!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73145

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.0 million to RED RIVER SERVICE CORPORATION for work described as: 200604!000217!5700!FA8101!OC-ALC/PKO !F3465002D0003 !A!N! !Y!0005 ! !20051205!20060930!025508651!793639196!793639196!N!RED RIVER SERVICE CORPORATION !9304 LEDGESTONE TERRACE !AUSTIN !TX!78737!73800!017!40!TINKER AFB !CANA… Key points: 1. Contract value of $11.03M over 2 years suggests a moderate annual spend. 2. The contract was competed, indicating potential for competitive pricing. 3. Performance risk appears low given the nature of the service and contractor. 4. This contract falls within the broader IT and Defense sectors. 5. The specific service is maintenance and repair of communication equipment.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $11,025,761 over approximately two years suggests an annual spend of around $5.5M. Without specific per-unit costs or detailed service level agreements, a direct comparison to similar contracts is challenging. However, the firm-fixed-price structure generally provides cost certainty for the government. The pricing appears reasonable for specialized maintenance and repair services within the defense sector, assuming the scope of work is well-defined and the contractor's overhead is managed efficiently.

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,' which implies a competitive process was initiated, but specific sources may have been excluded based on predefined criteria. The presence of 5 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition, which typically helps in achieving fair market prices. The exclusion of sources, if justified and transparent, should not unduly limit price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process, even with exclusions, generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a more competitive environment and potentially leading to better pricing than a sole-source award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force units relying on functional communication equipment. Services delivered include maintenance and repair of communication equipment. The geographic impact is centered around Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma. Workforce implications include support for skilled technicians and maintenance personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if maintenance needs exceed initial estimates.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical communication equipment repair.
Ensuring timely availability of specialized parts and expertise.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
Competitive bidding process suggests a market-driven price.
Contract duration of over two years allows for stable service provision.

Sector Analysis

This contract operates within the broader Information Technology and Defense sectors, specifically focusing on the maintenance and repair of specialized communication equipment. The market for such services is driven by the need for reliable and secure communication systems within government and military operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar equipment maintenance and repair services across various defense agencies, which often represent significant portions of defense budgets.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this specific contract, as it was not set aside for small businesses and the prime contractor, Red River Service Corporation, is not explicitly identified as a small business in this context. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist but are not detailed in the provided information. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether Red River Service Corporation utilizes small business subcontractors for specialized services or parts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics and oversight reports may not be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Defense Communications Systems Maintenance
Air Force Equipment Repair Contracts
IT Services for Military Branches
Communication Network Infrastructure Support

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition if source exclusions were overly restrictive.
Need for clear performance metrics to ensure value for money.
Reliance on contractor for critical communication infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.0 million to RED RIVER SERVICE CORPORATION. 200604!000217!5700!FA8101!OC-ALC/PKO !F3465002D0003 !A!N! !Y!0005 ! !20051205!20060930!025508651!793639196!793639196!N!RED RIVER SERVICE CORPORATION !9304 LEDGESTONE TERRACE !AUSTIN !TX!78737!73800!017!40!TINKER AFB !CANADIAN !OKLAHOMA !+000000579722!N!N!000000000000!J058!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !811213!E! !5!A!S! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RED RIVER SERVICE CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-12-05. End: 2007-12-31.

What is the track record of Red River Service Corporation in performing similar communication equipment repair and maintenance contracts for the federal government?

Red River Service Corporation has a history of performing various IT and telecommunications services for the federal government. While this specific contract focuses on communication equipment repair and maintenance, their broader experience likely includes network infrastructure, IT support, and potentially other hardware maintenance. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, including any past performance evaluations or awards, would provide a clearer picture of their capabilities and reliability in this specific service area. Information on contract modifications, disputes, or terminations on prior related contracts would also be relevant for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the awarded price of $11.03 million compare to market rates for similar communication equipment repair and maintenance services?

Benchmarking the $11.03 million contract value against market rates requires detailed information on the specific types of communication equipment, the scope of maintenance (preventive vs. corrective), labor rates, and geographic location. Given the firm-fixed-price nature, the government has locked in a price. However, without access to detailed cost breakdowns or a comprehensive market analysis conducted by the agency prior to award, it's difficult to definitively state if it's above or below market. The fact that 5 other companies bid suggests the price was perceived as achievable within the market.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract, and how has the contractor performed against them?

Key performance indicators for a contract of this nature typically include metrics such as response time for service requests, equipment uptime/availability, successful repair rates, adherence to maintenance schedules, and customer satisfaction. The provided data does not include specific KPIs or performance reports. However, the contract's firm-fixed-price structure and the award itself imply that the government anticipates satisfactory performance. Further investigation into contract performance reports or any quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs) would be necessary to assess actual performance against established metrics.

What is the historical spending pattern for communication equipment repair and maintenance services by the Department of the Air Force or Department of Defense?

The Department of Defense, including the Air Force, consistently spends significant amounts on the maintenance and repair of its vast array of communication equipment. This spending is driven by the critical need to maintain operational readiness and secure communication channels. Historical data would likely show a steady demand for these services, with spending fluctuating based on equipment modernization cycles, operational tempo, and budget allocations. Analyzing trends over several fiscal years would reveal the scale of this expenditure and identify any patterns in contracting for such services.

What is the potential impact of excluding certain sources during the competitive bidding process on the final contract price and overall value?

Excluding sources during a competitive bidding process, even under a 'full and open' umbrella, can potentially limit the breadth of competition. If the exclusions are based on stringent or narrowly defined criteria, fewer bidders may participate, potentially reducing downward pressure on prices. However, if the exclusions are justified (e.g., based on specialized capabilities, security clearances, or past performance requirements essential for the specific task), they can ensure that only qualified vendors compete, leading to a more robust and technically sound outcome. The impact on price and value is therefore contingent on the rationale and scope of the exclusions.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Other Services (except Public Administration) › Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance › Communication Equipment Repair and Maintenance

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

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 401 E JACKSON STREET, HARLINGEN, TX, 34

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F3465002D0003

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline