The Protective Group Inc. awarded $29.5M contract for apparel, raising questions about competition and value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,450,948 ($29.5M)

Contractor: THE Protective Group Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-01-24

End Date: 2008-11-30

Contract Duration: 676 days

Daily Burn Rate: $43.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ESAPI

Place of Performance

Location: HIALEAH, MIAMI-DADE County, FLORIDA, 33014

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.5 million to THE PROTECTIVE GROUP INC for work described as: ESAPI Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a non-competitive basis, limiting price discovery. 2. Significant contract value for apparel manufacturing suggests potential for cost efficiencies. 3. Limited competition raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible price. 4. The contract duration of 676 days indicates a substantial, ongoing need for these goods. 5. The specific nature of the apparel is not detailed, making direct performance benchmarking difficult. 6. Geographic location in Florida may influence local economic impact and logistics.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $29.5 million for apparel is substantial. Without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to benchmark the pricing against market rates or similar government contracts. The lack of competition suggests that the government may not have achieved optimal value for money. Further analysis would be needed to determine if the price paid was reasonable compared to industry standards for similar goods.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This approach is typically used when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement, or in urgent situations. The lack of competition means that multiple vendors did not have the opportunity to bid, which can limit price negotiation and potentially lead to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not benefit from the cost savings that typically arise from a competitive bidding environment.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army is the primary beneficiary, receiving necessary apparel. The contract supports the manufacturing and supply of apparel, likely for military personnel. The contract's execution in Florida has implications for the local economy and workforce in that state. The specific type of apparel is not detailed, but it is likely related to military operational needs.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated prices.
Sole-source award limits transparency in pricing.
Contract duration could mask inefficiencies if not closely monitored.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a specific entity, ensuring a dedicated supplier.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract duration suggests a stable, long-term requirement being met.

Sector Analysis

The apparel manufacturing sector is a mature industry with established supply chains. Government contracts for apparel, particularly for military use, represent a significant segment of this market. This contract, valued at $29.5 million, falls within the typical range for large-scale government procurement of specialized clothing. Benchmarking would involve comparing the unit costs and specifications to other similar military apparel contracts.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans is not available for this contract. As it was awarded sole-source, there may have been no opportunity to include specific provisions for small business participation. Further investigation into the prime contractor's own use of small businesses for subcontracting would be necessary to assess the broader impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. As a sole-source award, the justification for this procurement method would be subject to review. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature, and specific accountability measures would depend on the contract's performance clauses and any subsequent audits or Inspector General reviews.

Related Government Programs

Military Uniforms Procurement
Department of Defense Apparel Contracts
Federal Supply Schedule (if applicable)
Apparel Manufacturing Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Potential for inflated costs due to lack of competition.
Limited transparency on specific apparel type and justification.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.5 million to THE PROTECTIVE GROUP INC. ESAPI

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE PROTECTIVE GROUP INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-01-24. End: 2008-11-30.

What specific type of apparel was procured under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under the 'Other Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing' category (ND code 315999). However, the specific type of apparel is not detailed in the summary data. This could range from specialized tactical gear to standard issue uniforms or accessories. Understanding the exact nature of the apparel is crucial for assessing its necessity, potential risks associated with its use, and for comparing its cost to similar items procured by the government or in the commercial market. Without this detail, a full value assessment is challenging.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The data explicitly states the contract type as 'NOT COMPETED', which typically implies a sole-source award. The justification for such an award usually stems from a determination that only one responsible source is available to meet the government's needs. This could be due to unique technical requirements, proprietary technology, or urgent and compelling circumstances. Without the specific justification document (e.g., a Justification and Approval document), it's impossible to definitively state why this contract was not competed. This lack of competition is a key factor in assessing potential value for money.

How does the contract value of $29.5 million compare to typical spending on similar apparel by the Department of Defense?

The contract value of $29.5 million is substantial for apparel. To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against historical spending data for similar types of apparel procured by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies. Factors such as quantity, material specifications, and any unique features (e.g., flame resistance, specific camouflage patterns) would need to be considered. Without access to detailed historical spending data and the specific item descriptions for this contract, a precise comparison is difficult. However, a value of this magnitude suggests a large quantity or highly specialized items.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this size?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source contract of this magnitude is the potential for overpayment due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without competing bids, the contractor may have less incentive to offer the lowest possible price. Other risks include potential complacency from the contractor regarding quality or delivery timelines, and a lack of innovation. Furthermore, if the sole-source justification was weak or based on outdated information, it could indicate poor planning or a failure to explore alternative solutions that might have offered better value or performance.

What is the track record of The Protective Group Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

The provided data lists 'THE PROTECTIVE GROUP INC' as the contractor with a contract value of $29,450,948. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their past performance on federal contracts. This includes looking at the number of contracts awarded, their values, the agencies involved, and crucially, their performance history (e.g., on-time delivery, quality compliance, any disputes or terminations). A review of contract databases like FPDS or SAM.gov would be necessary to build a comprehensive profile of the contractor's experience and reliability, especially concerning Department of Defense procurements.

What oversight mechanisms were in place for this specific contract?

Given this was a Department of the Army contract, oversight would typically involve contract administration by the relevant Army contracting office. The 'Firm Fixed Price' contract type provides some cost certainty. However, the effectiveness of oversight for a sole-source award hinges on robust performance monitoring, quality assurance checks, and potentially, audits. The presence and jurisdiction of an Inspector General's office within the Department of Defense would also play a role in ensuring accountability and investigating any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing › Other Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: CLOTHING, INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT, INSIGNA, AND JEWELRY

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: 14000 NW 58TH CT, MIAMI LAKES, FL, 26

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $29,450,948

Exercised Options: $29,450,948

Current Obligation: $29,450,948

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W91CRB06D0004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline