Transportation awards $2.1M for electronic equipment repair, with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,106,053 ($2.1M)

Contractor: Clear Align LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2024-04-18

End Date: 2025-04-30

Contract Duration: 377 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 6973GH-20-D-00017 ADDING FUNDING TO CLIN 00030.

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73169

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $2.1 million to CLEAR ALIGN LLC for work described as: 6973GH-20-D-00017 ADDING FUNDING TO CLIN 00030. Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the fixed-price nature of the contract. 2. Competition dynamics are limited, raising potential concerns about price discovery. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with a focus on equipment repair and maintenance. 4. Performance context is a delivery order for ongoing services. 5. Sector positioning is within the broader electronic equipment maintenance industry.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $2.1 million for electronic equipment repair and maintenance is within a reasonable range for specialized services. As a delivery order under an existing contract, it suggests a pre-established pricing structure. Benchmarking against similar contracts for electronic equipment maintenance reveals that pricing can vary significantly based on the complexity and type of equipment. However, without specific details on the equipment being serviced, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, indicating that only one vendor, CLEAR ALIGN LLC, was considered capable of performing the required services. This approach limits the opportunity for competitive bidding and may result in higher prices than if multiple vendors had competed. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from the price discovery mechanisms that typically occur in a fully competed environment.

Taxpayer Impact: The sole-source award means taxpayers may not have received the lowest possible price for these services. Without competition, there is less pressure on the contractor to offer the most cost-effective solution.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits from the continued maintenance of critical electronic equipment. Services delivered include repair and maintenance for specialized electronic and precision equipment. The geographic impact is primarily in Oklahoma, where the contractor is located. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled technicians for equipment repair.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may lead to suboptimal pricing for taxpayers.
Sole-source awards can reduce the incentive for contractors to innovate or improve efficiency.
Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification could mask underlying issues.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Contract is for essential repair and maintenance services, ensuring operational continuity.
Contractor has an existing relationship with the agency, potentially leading to smoother execution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader sector of electronic and precision equipment repair and maintenance. This industry is characterized by specialized technical expertise and often involves long-term service agreements. The market size for such services is substantial, driven by the need to maintain complex systems across various government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without knowing the specific equipment, but agencies frequently contract for maintenance of avionics, communication systems, and other sensitive electronics.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to CLEAR ALIGN LLC, a single entity, does not directly benefit the small business ecosystem through set-asides or mandated subcontracting. The impact on small businesses is neutral in this specific award, as it does not appear to involve them.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. 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

Federal Aviation Administration Maintenance Contracts
Electronic Equipment Repair Services
Government IT and Equipment Maintenance

Risk Flags

Limited competition
Sole-source award

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $2.1 million to CLEAR ALIGN LLC. 6973GH-20-D-00017 ADDING FUNDING TO CLIN 00030.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CLEAR ALIGN LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-04-18. End: 2025-04-30.

What is the track record of CLEAR ALIGN LLC with the Department of Transportation or other federal agencies?

Information regarding CLEAR ALIGN LLC's specific track record with the Department of Transportation or other federal agencies is not detailed in the provided data. However, the award of this delivery order suggests a prior relationship or qualification that led to this sole-source selection. Further investigation into past performance reviews, contract history, and any reported issues or successes would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment of their track record. Agencies typically maintain performance metrics and feedback on contractors, which would be crucial for understanding their reliability and quality of service.

How does the $2.1 million value compare to similar electronic equipment repair contracts awarded by the FAA?

Without specific details on the type and complexity of the electronic equipment being repaired under this $2.1 million contract, a direct comparison to similar FAA contracts is challenging. The FAA procures a wide range of maintenance services for avionics, air traffic control systems, and other specialized equipment, with costs varying significantly. However, for general electronic and precision equipment repair and maintenance, $2.1 million over approximately 13 months (from April 2024 to April 2025) represents a substantial investment. Benchmarking would require access to a database of comparable contracts, factoring in equipment type, service level agreements, and contract duration to determine if this represents a competitive price point.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for electronic equipment repair?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for electronic equipment repair include potential overpricing due to the lack of competition, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or provide exceptional service, and a lack of transparency in the procurement process. Taxpayers may bear a higher cost than if the contract had been competed. Furthermore, reliance on a single provider can create vulnerabilities if that provider experiences financial difficulties, operational issues, or decides to discontinue services. The government also misses out on the opportunity to discover new or more cost-effective solutions that might emerge from a competitive bidding process.

How effective is the firm fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for money in this context?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring value for money for the government when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks of cost overruns are manageable. In the context of electronic equipment repair and maintenance, an FFP contract provides cost certainty, as the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. This shifts the burden of managing costs to the contractor, incentivizing them to perform efficiently. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the initial pricing being fair and competitive, which is a concern with sole-source awards. If the initial price is inflated due to lack of competition, the FFP structure, while providing certainty, may lock the government into a higher-than-necessary cost.

What is the historical spending pattern for electronic equipment repair and maintenance by the Federal Aviation Administration?

Historical spending patterns for electronic equipment repair and maintenance by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are not detailed in the provided data. However, it is reasonable to assume that the FAA, responsible for managing the nation's air traffic control system and related infrastructure, consistently invests significant funds in maintaining its complex electronic and precision equipment. This includes avionics, radar systems, communication devices, and computer hardware. Annual spending can fluctuate based on the lifecycle of equipment, technological upgrades, and the overall operational tempo. A review of historical FAA budgets and contract awards for maintenance services would be necessary to identify trends and specific spending levels.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 24 SIMON ST, NASHUA, NH, 03060

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Hispanic American Owned Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Manufacturer of Goods, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,106,053

Exercised Options: $2,106,053

Current Obligation: $2,106,053

Actual Outlays: $2,106,053

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 6973GH20D00017

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline