Department of the Army awarded $11.9M contract for apparel to The Protective Group Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,962,832 ($12.0M)

Contractor: THE Protective Group Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-11-27

End Date: 2008-10-31

Contract Duration: 339 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.3K/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 $12.0 million to THE PROTECTIVE GROUP INC for work described as: ESAPI Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price competition. 2. The contract was awarded for apparel and accessories, a common defense procurement category. 3. The contract duration was relatively short, suggesting a specific, immediate need. 4. The award value is moderate within the context of defense spending. 5. No small business set-aside was utilized for this procurement. 6. The contract was awarded under a firm fixed-price structure, shifting risk to the contractor.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $11.9 million for apparel is moderate. Without specific details on the type and quantity of apparel, a direct comparison to similar contracts is difficult. However, the sole-source nature of the award raises concerns about whether the government achieved the best possible price. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty but relies on the contractor's pricing accuracy. Benchmarking against market rates for similar items would be necessary for a more definitive value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a sole-source justification, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can meet the specific requirements, such as proprietary technology or unique capabilities. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery mechanisms that open competition provides, potentially leading to a higher price than if multiple bids were solicited.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. The government missed an opportunity to leverage market forces to secure a more cost-effective solution.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel who will receive the procured apparel. The contract delivers essential clothing and accessories to support military operations. The geographic impact is primarily within Florida, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications are localized to the contractor's facilities in Florida.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potentially increases cost to taxpayers.
Lack of transparency in the procurement process due to non-competitive award.
Absence of small business participation may limit broader economic impact.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Contract awarded to a specific company, potentially fulfilling a specialized need.
Contract duration was defined, indicating a clear scope and timeline.

Sector Analysis

The apparel and accessories sector within federal procurement is diverse, encompassing everything from uniforms to specialized protective gear. While this contract falls under general apparel manufacturing, it's part of a larger ecosystem of defense-related textile and garment production. Comparable spending benchmarks would vary significantly based on the specific items procured, but the overall defense spending on clothing and equipment runs into billions annually. This contract represents a small fraction of that total.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have included specific subcontracting goals for small businesses. The award to The Protective Group Inc., a single entity, suggests that opportunities for small business participation were either not sought or not feasible under the sole-source justification. This limits the potential for small businesses to benefit from this specific procurement and contribute to the defense supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. As a firm fixed-price contract, oversight would focus on ensuring delivery of goods that meet specifications and are delivered on time. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Uniforms Procurement
Defense Apparel Contracts
Apparel Manufacturing Services
Department of Defense Supply Chain

Risk Flags

Sole-source award may indicate lack of competition, potentially leading to higher prices.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.0 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 $12.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-11-27. End: 2008-10-31.

What specific types of apparel and accessories were procured under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'Other Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing' (NAICS code 315999). However, the specific items are not detailed in the summary data. This could range from general uniforms and accessories to specialized protective gear. Understanding the exact nature of the goods is crucial for assessing value for money and comparing it to market rates or other similar government procurements. Without this detail, the analysis remains general.

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

The data explicitly states the contract type was 'NOT COMPETED', which aligns with a sole-source award. The typical justifications for sole-source procurements include unique capabilities, proprietary technology, urgent and compelling needs where only one source can reasonably fulfill the requirement, or when a follow-on contract is awarded to the original source under specific circumstances. Without further documentation, the precise reason for The Protective Group Inc. being the sole source remains unspecified, but it implies a lack of readily available alternatives or a specific requirement that only they could meet.

How does the contract value of $11.9 million compare to typical spending on similar apparel contracts by the Department of Defense?

The $11.9 million award value is moderate for a Department of Defense contract. However, 'apparel and accessories' is a broad category. If this contract was for basic uniforms or standard accessories, it might be considered on the higher end for a sole-source award of this duration (less than a year). If it involved specialized or high-performance gear, the value could be more in line with market expectations. Benchmarking requires knowing the exact items, quantities, and specifications. The lack of competition inherently makes direct value comparison challenging.

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

The provided data shows this contract (awarded 2007-11-27, ending 2008-10-31) was for $11,962,832.00. To assess the contractor's track record, one would need to examine other contracts awarded to The Protective Group Inc. by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies. Key factors to consider would include past performance ratings, any history of contract disputes or terminations, on-time delivery rates, and compliance with contract terms. This single data point does not provide a comprehensive view of their overall performance history.

What were the performance expectations and delivery timelines for this contract?

The contract had a duration of 339 days, from November 27, 2007, to October 31, 2008. This indicates a relatively short-term requirement for the delivery of apparel and accessories. The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type implies that the contractor was obligated to deliver the specified goods within this timeframe and according to the defined quality standards. Performance expectations would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS), which are not included in the provided summary data.

Were there any identified risks associated with this contract, either during its award or execution?

The primary risk identified is associated with the sole-source award. This limits price competition, potentially leading to higher costs for the government and taxpayers. Other potential risks, common to many federal contracts, could include delivery delays, quality issues, or contractor performance failures. However, the firm fixed-price nature shifts some financial risk (e.g., cost overruns) to the contractor. Without access to the contract's risk assessment documentation or performance history, a detailed analysis of specific risks is not possible from the provided data.

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

Solicitation ID: W91CRB05R0020

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: $11,962,832

Exercised Options: $11,962,832

Current Obligation: $11,962,832

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W91CRB06D0004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline