Treasury's $815K System Furniture Purchase Order Awarded to TALU LLC Under Non-Competitive Process

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $81,541 ($81.5K)

Contractor: Talu LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of the Treasury

Start Date: 2020-07-13

End Date: 2020-08-28

Contract Duration: 46 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SYSTEM FURNITURE

Place of Performance

Location: HERNDON, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20171

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Treasury obligated $81,541.13 to TALU LLC for work described as: SYSTEM FURNITURE Key points: 1. The contract was awarded as a purchase order, indicating a potentially smaller scale or specific need. 2. The short duration of 46 days suggests a time-sensitive requirement for the furniture. 3. The award was not competed under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), raising questions about potential cost savings through competition. 4. The fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government. 5. The vendor, TALU LLC, is the sole awardee, highlighting a lack of broader market engagement for this specific procurement. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 337214 points to the manufacturing of office furniture, excluding wood. 7. The contract was awarded in Virginia, indicating a specific geographic need or vendor location.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $815,411.13 purchase order for system furniture is challenging without more detailed specifications and market comparisons. Given the sole-source nature of the award, it is difficult to assess if competitive pricing was achieved. The price appears substantial for a 46-day delivery period, and without a competitive process, it's hard to determine if it represents fair market value or if taxpayers received the best possible price. Further analysis would require understanding the specific furniture items, quantities, and installation requirements.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' purchase order, indicating it was not openly competed. The specific reasons for this sole-source award are not detailed, but it suggests that either only one vendor was considered capable of meeting the requirement, or there were other justifications for bypassing a competitive process. The lack of competition means that potential cost savings that could arise from multiple bids were likely forgone.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition for this significant purchase means taxpayers may not have benefited from the most cost-effective pricing that a competitive bidding process could have yielded.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are likely federal employees within the Department of the Treasury, specifically the Internal Revenue Service, who will receive new system furniture. The services delivered involve the provision and potentially installation of office furniture. The geographic impact is localized to the facility where the furniture is deployed within Virginia. There are no direct workforce implications mentioned, but the procurement supports the office furniture manufacturing sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and missed opportunities for cost savings.
The sole-source award limits transparency into the vendor selection process and justification.
The short contract duration might indicate rushed procurement, potentially leading to less favorable terms.
Absence of small business subcontracting goals or reporting requirements.

Positive Signals

The use of a firm-fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for the government.
The award is for system furniture, suggesting a standardized need that might be efficiently met by a specialized manufacturer.
The vendor is identified, allowing for future performance tracking.

Sector Analysis

The office furniture manufacturing sector (NAICS 337214) is a mature industry. Federal agencies are significant purchasers of office furniture, often requiring specific ergonomic and security features. Spending in this sector can range from small individual purchases to large-scale office fit-outs. Without specific details on the type and quantity of system furniture, it's difficult to benchmark this $815K purchase against broader government spending trends or industry averages for similar large-scale procurements.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, TALU LLC, is not mandated to engage small businesses for fulfilling this order, potentially limiting opportunities for the small business ecosystem in this specific procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this purchase order would typically fall under the Department of the Treasury's internal procurement regulations and the contracting officer responsible for the award. As it was a purchase order, it likely falls under specific thresholds for simplified acquisition, which may have less stringent formal oversight compared to larger, more complex contracts. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and lack of detailed public justification. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) for Office Furniture
Department of Defense Office Furniture Procurements
Other Agency Office Fit-Out Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award without clear justification
Potential lack of price competition
Limited transparency into vendor selection
No apparent small business subcontracting requirements

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Treasury awarded $81,541.13 to TALU LLC. SYSTEM FURNITURE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TALU LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $81,541.13.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-07-13. End: 2020-08-28.

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

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' (Simplified Acquisition Procedures). This designation suggests that a competitive process was not followed. Standard justifications for sole-source awards often include: only one responsible source being available; an urgent and compelling need; or a specific national defense requirement. Without access to the contract file or award justification documentation, the precise reason for bypassing competition for this $815,411.13 purchase order remains unknown. Further inquiry with the Department of the Treasury's contracting office would be necessary to ascertain the official justification.

How does the price of $815,411.13 for system furniture compare to similar federal contracts or market rates?

Direct price comparison is difficult without knowing the exact specifications, quantity, and quality of the system furniture procured. However, $815,411.13 is a substantial amount for office furniture, especially for a contract with a short 46-day duration. Federal Supply Schedules (FSS) managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) offer pre-negotiated pricing for office furniture, which typically represents competitive market rates. If this purchase order significantly deviates from FSS pricing for comparable items, it could indicate a less favorable price. The lack of competition further complicates a value assessment, as market forces that drive down prices were not engaged.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a contract of this value without competition?

The primary risk associated with awarding a contract of this value ($815,411.13) without competition is the potential for paying a higher price than necessary. A competitive process allows multiple vendors to bid, driving prices down and ensuring the government receives the best value. Without competition, there's a risk of vendor lock-in, reduced innovation, and potentially lower quality if the sole-source vendor is not incentivized to perform at their best. Furthermore, it raises concerns about fairness and equal opportunity for other qualified vendors in the market. Transparency is also reduced, making it harder to justify the expenditure to taxpayers.

What is the track record of TALU LLC in fulfilling federal contracts, particularly for office furniture?

Information regarding TALU LLC's specific track record with federal contracts, especially for office furniture, is not detailed in the provided data. As the sole awardee of this $815,411.13 purchase order, their performance on this contract would be a key indicator. To assess their track record, one would typically look at past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), the number and types of previous federal awards, and any history of contract disputes or terminations. Without this additional data, it's difficult to gauge their reliability and past success in delivering similar goods or services to the government.

What is the significance of the contract type being 'FIRM FIXED PRICE' for this procurement?

A Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type means that the contractor, TALU LLC, is obligated to complete the work (deliver the system furniture) for a predetermined price, regardless of the actual costs incurred. This offers significant cost certainty to the government (Department of the Treasury). The risk of cost overruns is borne entirely by the contractor. For a procurement like this, where the scope of work (specific furniture items and quantities) is likely well-defined, FFP is a common and appropriate contract type. It protects the government from unexpected price increases but requires careful initial price negotiation.

How does the $815K spending on system furniture fit into the broader context of the IRS's or Treasury's overall IT or facilities budget?

The provided data focuses solely on this specific purchase order for system furniture and does not offer insights into the broader IT or facilities budget of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or the Department of the Treasury. $815,411.13 represents a significant expenditure for office furniture, but its proportion within a multi-billion dollar agency budget is unclear. To contextualize this spending, one would need to compare it against annual budgets for facilities management, office renovations, or capital equipment purchases within the IRS and Treasury. Understanding the agency's overall capital investment strategy and prior spending on similar items would provide better context for this specific procurement.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing › Office Furniture (except Wood) Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: FURNITURE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2553 DULLES VIEW DR STE 700, HERNDON, VA, 20171

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $81,541

Exercised Options: $81,541

Current Obligation: $81,541

Actual Outlays: $81,541

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline