Interior's Bureau of Land Management awards $30,000 for noxious weed control in Utah

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,000 ($30.0K)

Contractor: County of Rich

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2022-10-01

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $21/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL RICH COUNTY WEED DEPARTMENT

Place of Performance

Location: GARDEN CITY, RICH County, UTAH, 84028

State: Utah Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $30,000 to COUNTY OF RICH for work described as: NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL RICH COUNTY WEED DEPARTMENT Key points: 1. Contract awarded via purchase order, indicating a streamlined procurement process for a relatively small value. 2. The contract duration of 1460 days (4 years) suggests a need for ongoing weed management services. 3. Fixed price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the agency. 4. The geographic focus on Rich County, Utah, highlights localized environmental management efforts. 5. The service category is Landscaping Services, specifically for noxious weed control.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $30,000 over four years is relatively small, averaging $7,500 annually. Without specific benchmarks for noxious weed control services in Rich County, Utah, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the low overall value suggests it may be cost-effective for the specific services rendered. Comparison to similar small-scale, localized environmental service contracts would be necessary for a more robust assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a 'NOT COMPETED' purchase order, indicating it was not subject to a competitive bidding process. This could be due to various reasons, such as the small value of the contract or a specific justification for a sole-source award. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity to explore multiple vendor offerings or potentially secure lower pricing through a bidding war.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a non-competed award means there's a reduced assurance that the most cost-effective solution was secured. While the dollar amount is small, the principle of competition is generally favored to ensure optimal use of public funds.

Public Impact

Local residents and land users in Rich County, Utah, will benefit from improved land health and reduced invasive species. The services delivered will focus on the control and management of noxious weeds, preserving native ecosystems. The geographic impact is confined to Rich County, Utah, addressing a specific regional environmental concern. This contract supports local environmental stewardship and potentially local employment for weed control services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition limits price discovery and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
The specific performance metrics and quality control for weed control are not detailed in the provided data.
Reliance on a single vendor without competition could lead to complacency or reduced service quality over time.

Positive Signals

The contract addresses a specific environmental need (noxious weed control) for a defined geographic area.
The fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the agency.
The purchase order mechanism is suitable for smaller, well-defined service needs.

Sector Analysis

Noxious weed control falls under environmental services and landscaping within the broader government contracting sector. The market for such services can be localized, with many small to medium-sized businesses specializing in land management and ecological restoration. Government agencies often contract for these services to manage public lands, mitigate environmental damage, and comply with regulations. The $30,000 value is typical for smaller, localized environmental service contracts rather than large-scale land management projects.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate if this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. Given the small value and the 'NOT COMPETED' status, it is less likely to have specific small business provisions unless the sole-source award was to a small business. Further investigation would be needed to determine the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this purchase order would typically fall under the Bureau of Land Management's regional or state office responsible for land management in Utah. Accountability would be managed through contract administration, ensuring the vendor fulfills the terms of the purchase order. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature and the small dollar value, which may not trigger extensive public reporting requirements beyond basic contract award notices.

Related Government Programs

Bureau of Land Management Land Management Contracts
Department of the Interior Environmental Services
Noxious Weed Management Programs
Utah State Environmental Contracts

Risk Flags

Non-competitive award
Limited performance data available
Contractor is a local government entity, potentially lacking federal contracting experience

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $30,000 to COUNTY OF RICH. NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL RICH COUNTY WEED DEPARTMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COUNTY OF RICH.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (Bureau of Land Management).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30,000.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-10-01. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for noxious weed control by the Bureau of Land Management in Utah?

Analyzing historical spending for noxious weed control by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Utah requires access to detailed federal procurement data over several fiscal years. Typically, agencies like the BLM allocate funds annually for land management activities, which include invasive species control. Spending can fluctuate based on environmental conditions, specific program priorities, and available appropriations. Contracts for weed control can range from small, localized purchase orders for specific counties, similar to this one, to larger, multi-year contracts covering broader regions or multiple states. Factors influencing spending include the severity of weed infestations, the types of weeds targeted, and the chosen control methods (e.g., manual removal, chemical treatment, biological control). Without specific historical data for BLM Utah's weed control expenditures, it's challenging to establish a precise pattern, but it's reasonable to assume a consistent, albeit variable, allocation for this essential land management function.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar noxious weed control services in other regions?

Benchmarking the pricing of this $30,000 contract for noxious weed control against similar services in other regions is difficult without more specific details on the scope of work, treatment methods, and labor rates. This contract is a purchase order for Rich County, Utah, over four years, averaging $7,500 annually. Such localized contracts often reflect regional labor costs and the specific challenges of the local environment. Larger, competitively bid contracts might achieve economies of scale, potentially offering lower per-unit costs, but may also include broader service areas or more intensive treatments. To conduct a proper comparison, one would need data on contracts with similar service types (e.g., manual removal, herbicide application), geographic scope, and duration from comparable regions. Given the small scale and non-competed nature of this award, a direct price comparison is challenging, but the annual average suggests a focus on targeted, localized efforts rather than large-scale eradication campaigns.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a sole-source contract for environmental services like weed control?

Awarding a sole-source contract for environmental services like noxious weed control carries several potential risks. Primarily, the lack of competition means the government may not be obtaining the best possible price, as there's no incentive for vendors to underbid. This can lead to overpayment and inefficient use of taxpayer funds. Secondly, without competition, there's a reduced assurance of receiving the highest quality service or the most innovative solutions, as the agency is limited to the capabilities of the single awarded vendor. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes dependent on that specific contractor, potentially making it difficult to switch providers in the future even if performance is subpar. Furthermore, sole-source awards can raise concerns about fairness and equal opportunity for other qualified businesses that were not given a chance to bid. For environmental services, risks could also include inadequate coverage, improper treatment methods, or failure to adapt to changing environmental conditions if the sole-source vendor lacks the necessary expertise or resources.

What is the track record of the contractor (COUNTY OF RICH WEED DEPARTMENT) in performing similar federal contracts?

The provided data indicates the contractor is the 'COUNTY OF RICH WEED DEPARTMENT'. This suggests the contractor is a local government entity rather than a private firm. As such, its track record in performing *federal* contracts may be limited or non-existent. Local government departments typically operate under state and local regulations and funding mechanisms. While they possess expertise in their designated area (noxious weed control within Rich County), their experience with federal procurement processes, reporting requirements, and contract administration standards might be less developed compared to established federal contractors. It is crucial to ascertain if this department has prior experience managing federal funds or fulfilling federal contract obligations. If this is their first federal contract, the agency (Bureau of Land Management) would need to provide robust oversight to ensure compliance and successful execution of the services.

How effective are current noxious weed control methods employed by the Bureau of Land Management?

The effectiveness of noxious weed control methods employed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is a complex issue that depends heavily on the specific methods used, the type of weeds, the ecosystem being treated, and the scale of the infestation. The BLM utilizes a range of strategies, including integrated pest management (IPM) approaches that combine chemical, biological, mechanical, and cultural controls. Chemical treatments (herbicides) can be effective but raise environmental concerns. Biological controls (introducing natural enemies) can be sustainable but take time to establish and may not be suitable for all weed types. Mechanical methods (e.g., hand-pulling, mowing) are labor-intensive and often best for small infestations or sensitive areas. The effectiveness of any single contract, like the one for Rich County, is measured against its specific objectives and the resources allocated. Long-term success often requires sustained effort, monitoring, and adaptive management strategies to prevent re-infestation and the spread of invasive species across larger landscapes.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Services to Buildings and Dwellings › Landscaping Services

Product/Service Code: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT › NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVERVAT SVCS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: DOILFBO220068

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 20 S MAIN ST, RANDOLPH, UT, 84064

Business Categories: Category Business, Council of Governments, Government, U.S. Local Government, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $37,500

Exercised Options: $30,000

Current Obligation: $30,000

Actual Outlays: $22,500

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline