DHS awards $10.17M contract for wireless communications equipment to ACG Systems, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,174,111 ($10.2M)

Contractor: ACG Systems, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2025-09-29

End Date: 2026-09-28

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: AWARD

Place of Performance

Location: ANNAPOLIS, ANNE ARUNDEL County, MARYLAND, 21401

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $10.2 million to ACG SYSTEMS, INC. for work described as: AWARD Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The firm fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 3. The contract duration is one year, indicating a need for immediate or short-term services. 4. The award is a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger contract vehicle. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 334220 points to the manufacturing of radio and television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment. 6. The contract is not set aside for small businesses, implying larger firms were likely involved.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The award amount of $10.17 million for a one-year contract for wireless communications equipment appears reasonable given the sector. Benchmarking against similar contracts for specialized communication equipment is necessary for a definitive value assessment. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the Department of Homeland Security.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this specialized equipment. A higher number of bidders would typically lead to more aggressive pricing and potentially better value.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple vendors to offer their best pricing, potentially driving down costs.

Public Impact

The Department of Homeland Security, specifically U.S. Customs and Border Protection, will benefit from this contract by acquiring necessary wireless communications equipment. The equipment is crucial for maintaining and enhancing border security operations. The contract's geographic impact is primarily within Maryland, where the contractor is located, but the equipment's use will support national security efforts. The contract supports the manufacturing sector, potentially impacting the workforce involved in producing specialized wireless communications equipment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in if this equipment requires proprietary support or future upgrades.
Reliance on a single delivery order for critical equipment could pose a risk if supply chains are disrupted.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive process.
Firm fixed-price contract type helps manage cost overruns.
Contract duration is clearly defined, allowing for focused execution.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Information Technology and Communications sector, specifically the manufacturing of radio and television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment. This is a critical area for government operations, particularly for agencies like Homeland Security that rely on robust communication networks. Market size for specialized government communications equipment can vary significantly based on technological advancements and agency needs.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary awardee is likely a larger entity, and the scope of work may not have been structured to facilitate small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will be provided by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. As a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle, oversight may also be influenced by the terms of the base contract. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, but specific performance monitoring details are not publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Department of Homeland Security Communications Equipment Procurement
Wireless Communications Infrastructure Contracts
Federal Law Enforcement Technology Acquisition

Risk Flags

Potential for technology obsolescence
Supply chain vulnerability for specialized components
Dependence on underlying base contract vehicle

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $10.2 million to ACG SYSTEMS, INC.. AWARD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ACG SYSTEMS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Customs and Border Protection).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-09-29. End: 2026-09-28.

What is the track record of ACG Systems, Inc. in fulfilling federal contracts, particularly for wireless communications equipment?

A review of federal procurement data indicates that ACG Systems, Inc. has a history of receiving federal contracts. To provide a comprehensive assessment of their track record specifically for wireless communications equipment, a deeper dive into their past performance on similar contracts would be necessary. This would involve examining contract completion rates, any reported performance issues or disputes, and customer satisfaction feedback if available through sources like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Without this specific data, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability for this particular award.

How does the awarded price of $10.17 million for this one-year contract compare to similar procurements for comparable wireless communication equipment?

Benchmarking the $10.17 million award against similar contracts is crucial for assessing value for money. This comparison would ideally involve analyzing contracts awarded by other federal agencies or even state and local governments for equipment with similar technical specifications, quantities, and delivery timelines. Factors such as the specific type of wireless technology (e.g., encrypted radios, mobile data terminals), manufacturer, and included services (installation, maintenance) would need to be standardized. Without access to a detailed database of comparable contract pricing, a precise benchmark is challenging, but the firm fixed-price nature of this award provides a degree of cost certainty for the government.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, considering the vendor, contract type, and equipment involved?

Several risks are associated with this contract. Firstly, reliance on a single vendor for specialized wireless communications equipment could lead to vendor lock-in, making future procurements or upgrades more expensive or complex. Secondly, as this is a delivery order, the overall performance and reliability depend on the underlying base contract vehicle. Potential risks also include supply chain disruptions affecting the delivery of specialized components, or the possibility that the technology could become obsolete quickly in the rapidly evolving communications landscape. Finally, while the firm fixed-price contract mitigates cost overrun risks for the government, it places the cost risk on the contractor, which could indirectly impact performance if the contractor faces unforeseen financial challenges.

How effective is the firm fixed-price contract type in ensuring the government receives the best value for this wireless communications equipment?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective in ensuring the government receives good value when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks of performance are manageable. For the procurement of specific wireless communications equipment, an FFP contract provides cost certainty, as the contractor agrees to a fixed price regardless of their actual costs. This incentivizes the contractor to manage their own costs efficiently. However, the effectiveness in achieving the 'best' value also depends on the level of competition during the bidding process. If competition is limited, the initial fixed price might be higher than necessary. Furthermore, for complex or evolving technologies, an FFP contract might discourage innovation or the inclusion of additional features if they were not explicitly defined in the initial scope.

What is the historical spending pattern for wireless communications equipment by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for wireless communications equipment by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is essential for contextualizing this $10.17 million award. While specific historical figures for this exact category are not provided, DHS and CBP are known to invest significantly in communication technologies to support their vast operational mandates, including border security, law enforcement, and emergency response. Spending in this area typically fluctuates based on technological upgrades, new program requirements, and the lifecycle of existing equipment. A review of past solicitations and awards within the NAICS code 334220 and related communication equipment categories would reveal trends in contract values, types of equipment procured, and primary vendors, allowing for a comparison of the current award against historical norms.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Communications Equipment Manufacturing › Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 133 DEFENSE HWY STE 207, ANNAPOLIS, MD, 21401

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,174,111

Exercised Options: $10,174,111

Current Obligation: $10,174,111

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 70B04C19D00000025

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline