Transportation Department awards $19.6K contract for MFP maintenance, covering 3 years of service

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,584 ($19.6K)

Contractor: THE Lioce Group Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2024-05-27

End Date: 2027-05-26

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18/day

Competition Type: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PURCHASE ORDER FOR KONICA MINOLTA MFP POOLED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT TO SERVICE 6 UNITS

Place of Performance

Location: VANCOUVER, CLARK County, WASHINGTON, 98661

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $19,584 to THE LIOCE GROUP INC for work described as: PURCHASE ORDER FOR KONICA MINOLTA MFP POOLED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT TO SERVICE 6 UNITS Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the 3-year service term for 6 units. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a competed contract, suggesting potential for fair pricing. 3. Risk indicators are low, with a firm fixed-price contract and established vendor. 4. Performance context involves routine maintenance for essential office equipment. 5. Sector positioning is within general administrative support services for the agency.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19,584 over three years for maintaining 6 Multi-Function Printers (MFPs) suggests a cost of approximately $1,088 per unit per year. This appears to be a competitive rate for comprehensive maintenance, including parts and labor, especially when compared to typical OEM service agreements which can often exceed this annual cost. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the agency.

Cost Per Unit: Approximately $1,088 per unit per year.

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was competed under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), indicating a competitive process suitable for smaller dollar value procurements. While the specific number of bids received is not detailed, the use of SAP generally encourages multiple offers, leading to price discovery and potentially better value. The agency's decision to compete this requirement suggests a commitment to leveraging market forces.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award, even under SAP, is beneficial for taxpayers as it helps ensure the government is not overpaying for essential maintenance services.

Public Impact

The Federal Highway Administration benefits from reliable office equipment operation. Essential printing, scanning, and copying services are maintained for administrative staff. The geographic impact is localized to the Washington D.C. area where the units are located. Workforce implications are minimal, focusing on ensuring administrative staff have functional tools.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in if renewal terms are not carefully reviewed.
Dependence on a single vendor for maintenance could lead to price increases in future contracts.
Scope creep if additional services beyond standard maintenance are requested without formal modification.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty.
Competitive award process suggests reasonable pricing.
Longer-term agreement (3 years) can reduce administrative burden of frequent re-competition.
Established vendor (The Lioce Group Inc.) likely has familiarity with agency needs.

Sector Analysis

The market for office equipment maintenance is mature and highly competitive, with numerous providers offering service contracts for various brands. This contract falls within the broader category of business support services and electronic equipment repair. Spending benchmarks for such services vary widely based on equipment type, volume, and service level agreements, but this contract's value appears aligned with typical market rates for pooled maintenance of standard office equipment.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to involve significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses based on the nature of the service. The primary contractor, The Lioce Group Inc., is not explicitly identified as a small business in the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal for this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically reside with the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Federal Highway Administration. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract simplifies oversight by focusing on service delivery against agreed-upon terms. Transparency is maintained through the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) where contract awards are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) Schedule contracts for office equipment maintenance
Agency-specific IT and equipment maintenance budgets
Procurements for office supplies and equipment

Risk Flags

Potential for price increase upon contract renewal.
Service level agreement clarity and enforcement.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $19,584 to THE LIOCE GROUP INC. PURCHASE ORDER FOR KONICA MINOLTA MFP POOLED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT TO SERVICE 6 UNITS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE LIOCE GROUP INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19,584.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-05-27. End: 2027-05-26.

What is the track record of The Lioce Group Inc. with federal contracts?

The Lioce Group Inc. has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily for maintenance and repair of office equipment, including printers and copiers. Analysis of their contract history in the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would reveal the volume and value of awards, agencies served, and types of services rendered. A review of past performance evaluations, if available, would provide insights into their reliability and customer satisfaction. While this specific contract is for a relatively small amount, their broader federal footprint can indicate their capacity and experience in serving government clients.

How does the per-unit cost compare to similar pooled maintenance agreements?

The per-unit cost of approximately $1,088 per MFP per year appears competitive for a 3-year firm fixed-price maintenance agreement. Benchmarking against similar pooled maintenance contracts for 6 units across federal agencies would provide a more precise comparison. Factors influencing cost include the specific MFP models, the scope of services (e.g., preventative maintenance, on-site response time, parts included), and the geographic location. Generally, pooled agreements offer economies of scale compared to individual service calls, and this rate seems reasonable within that context, avoiding the higher costs often associated with OEM-direct service contracts.

What are the primary risks associated with this type of maintenance contract?

The primary risks associated with this type of maintenance contract include potential vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes reliant on a single provider, potentially leading to price escalations upon renewal. Another risk is the possibility of scope creep, where additional services beyond the defined maintenance agreement are requested without proper contract modification, leading to unbudgeted costs. Furthermore, if the vendor's service quality declines or response times increase, it could disrupt agency operations. Ensuring clear service level agreements (SLAs) and diligent oversight are crucial to mitigating these risks.

How effective is a 3-year fixed-price agreement for MFP maintenance?

A 3-year fixed-price agreement for MFP maintenance can be highly effective in providing budget certainty and reducing administrative burden associated with frequent re-competition. It allows the agency to lock in costs for a predictable period, shielding it from potential market fluctuations or inflation. This duration is often a good balance, long enough to realize economies of scale and establish a working relationship with the vendor, but not so long as to risk being locked into outdated technology or unfavorable terms. Effectiveness hinges on the initial negotiation of a fair price and comprehensive service level agreements.

What is the historical spending pattern for MFP maintenance at the Federal Highway Administration?

Historical spending patterns for MFP maintenance at the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) would likely show recurring procurements for similar services. Analyzing past contracts, including their values, durations, and awarded vendors, would reveal trends in spending levels and competition. For instance, one might observe if the agency consistently uses competitive bidding, if certain vendors are frequently awarded contracts, or if there's a trend towards longer-term agreements. Understanding this history helps in assessing whether the current contract represents a continuation of established practices or a deviation, and whether current spending is in line with historical norms.

Are there opportunities for consolidation or strategic sourcing of MFP maintenance services?

Opportunities for consolidation and strategic sourcing of MFP maintenance services often exist within federal agencies. By aggregating the needs of multiple offices or even multiple agencies, significant cost savings can be achieved through larger, more competitive solicitations. This could involve leveraging existing General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules, participating in government-wide acquisition contracts (GWACs), or conducting agency-wide strategic sourcing initiatives. Consolidating requirements can increase purchasing power, simplify contract management, and potentially attract a wider range of vendors, including those offering innovative solutions or better pricing structures.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Solicitation ID: 69056724Q000014

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2950 DRAKE AVE SW, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35805

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,592

Exercised Options: $29,376

Current Obligation: $19,584

Actual Outlays: $17,136

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline