FEMA awards $8.2M for Alaska wireless services to GCI Communication Corp. to support disaster relief

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $8,207 ($8.2K)

Contractor: GCI Communication Corp.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2025-11-01

End Date: 2026-04-30

Contract Duration: 180 days

Daily Burn Rate: $46/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: WIRELESS SERVICE FOR ALASKA DISASTER DECLARATION DR-4893-AK TO PROVIDE CELLULAR AND MIFI SERVICES IN REMOTE AREAS OF ALASKA NOT COVERED BY MAJOR CELL SERVICE PROVIDERS.

Place of Performance

Location: ANCHORAGE, ANCHORAGE County, ALASKA, 99513

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $8,207 to GCI COMMUNICATION CORP. for work described as: WIRELESS SERVICE FOR ALASKA DISASTER DECLARATION DR-4893-AK TO PROVIDE CELLULAR AND MIFI SERVICES IN REMOTE AREAS OF ALASKA NOT COVERED BY MAJOR CELL SERVICE PROVIDERS. Key points: 1. Contract addresses critical communication gaps in remote disaster-stricken areas. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about competition and potential cost savings. 3. Limited duration suggests a response to an immediate disaster need. 4. Focus on cellular and MiFi services indicates a need for mobile connectivity. 5. Geographic focus on Alaska highlights unique infrastructure challenges. 6. Award value appears reasonable for specialized, remote service provision.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The award of $8.2 million for 18 months of wireless service in remote Alaskan disaster areas appears to be within a reasonable range given the specialized nature of the service and the challenging operating environment. However, without competitive bidding, it is difficult to benchmark against market rates or assess if the most cost-effective solution was secured. The firm fixed-price contract type 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, meaning GCI Communication Corp. was the only vendor considered. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required service, often in emergency situations or when unique capabilities are needed. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from a bidding process that could have driven down prices or offered alternative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. The sole-source nature limits the government's ability to ensure it received the best possible value for the funds expended.

Public Impact

Disaster-affected residents and first responders in remote Alaskan regions will benefit from improved cellular and MiFi services. Essential communication services will be restored or enhanced in areas lacking traditional infrastructure. The contract supports disaster recovery efforts by enabling communication for relief operations. Workforce involved in disaster response and recovery in Alaska will have access to vital connectivity.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price discovery and potential cost savings.
Lack of competition may reduce incentive for vendor to offer best value.
Remote Alaskan deployment presents logistical and operational challenges that could impact service reliability and cost.

Positive Signals

Addresses critical need for communication in disaster-declared areas.
Focus on remote areas highlights commitment to underserved populations.
Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the telecommunications sector, specifically wireless telecommunications carriers. The market for providing wireless services in remote and challenging environments like Alaska is often characterized by limited providers and high infrastructure costs. This award addresses a niche but critical need for connectivity in areas not typically served by major carriers, especially during disaster events.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides or subcontracting opportunities. The sole-source nature of the award and the specialized services required likely meant that larger, established providers were the primary focus. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any small businesses were involved in the supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for overseeing this contract. As a purchase order under a disaster declaration, oversight would focus on ensuring service delivery meets the stated requirements and supports disaster relief efforts. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases, but specific performance metrics and oversight reports may not be publicly detailed.

Related Government Programs

Disaster Relief Funding
Emergency Communications
Alaska Infrastructure Projects
Remote Area Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Remote operational environment
Disaster-specific need

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $8,207 to GCI COMMUNICATION CORP.. WIRELESS SERVICE FOR ALASKA DISASTER DECLARATION DR-4893-AK TO PROVIDE CELLULAR AND MIFI SERVICES IN REMOTE AREAS OF ALASKA NOT COVERED BY MAJOR CELL SERVICE PROVIDERS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GCI COMMUNICATION CORP..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $8,207.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-11-01. End: 2026-04-30.

What is the track record of GCI Communication Corp. in providing wireless services during disaster events?

GCI Communication Corp. is a major telecommunications provider in Alaska, with extensive experience operating in the state's unique and challenging environment. While specific details on their performance during past disaster declarations are not provided in this data, their established presence suggests a capacity to manage remote deployments. However, the effectiveness and reliability of their services during the specific disaster event (DR-4893-AK) would require a review of performance reports and user feedback. Given the sole-source nature, it's important to ensure their past performance justifies this direct award without further vetting through competition.

How does the cost of this contract compare to similar wireless service contracts in remote or disaster-stricken areas?

Benchmarking the cost of this $8.2 million contract for 18 months of wireless service is challenging due to the specific nature of the requirement (disaster relief in remote Alaska) and the sole-source award. Typically, services in remote areas incur higher costs due to infrastructure, logistics, and limited provider options. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to ascertain if GCI's pricing is optimal. Comparable contracts would need to be identified based on geographic remoteness, service type (cellular, MiFi), duration, and the specific disaster context. A detailed cost analysis by FEMA, even for a sole-source award, would be beneficial to justify the expenditure.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract for wireless services?

The primary risks associated with this sole-source contract include potential overpayment due to lack of competition, limited vendor accountability if alternatives were available, and potential service disruptions if GCI faces unforeseen operational challenges in remote areas. The government is reliant on GCI's ability to deliver and maintain services under difficult conditions without the leverage of a competitive market. Ensuring robust contract management and performance monitoring is crucial to mitigate these risks. Furthermore, the reliance on a single provider could pose a risk if the disaster situation extends beyond the contract period and requires immediate, alternative solutions.

How effective is the current contract in meeting the communication needs during the specified disaster declaration?

The effectiveness of this contract in meeting communication needs during disaster declaration DR-4893-AK is contingent on the actual deployment and performance of GCI's wireless services. The contract aims to provide essential cellular and MiFi services in remote areas lacking coverage, which is critical for first responders, relief workers, and affected populations. Its effectiveness will be measured by the reliability, availability, and quality of the provided services, as well as the extent to which it facilitates disaster response and recovery operations. Post-contract performance reviews and feedback from end-users would provide a clearer picture of its success.

What are the historical spending patterns for wireless services in Alaska by FEMA or other agencies?

Historical spending patterns for wireless services in Alaska by FEMA or other agencies, particularly in disaster contexts, are not detailed in the provided data. However, it is generally understood that providing telecommunications infrastructure and services in Alaska is significantly more expensive than in the contiguous United States due to vast distances, harsh climate, and limited existing infrastructure. FEMA's spending in such areas is typically reactive, tied to specific disaster declarations. Analyzing past FEMA expenditures related to communication support in Alaska could provide context, but such data would need to be sourced from broader federal procurement databases.

What are the implications of the 18-month duration for disaster recovery efforts?

The 18-month duration of this contract suggests that the wireless services are intended to support immediate disaster response and a significant portion of the recovery phase. This timeframe acknowledges that restoring or establishing robust communication infrastructure in remote disaster-stricken areas can be a lengthy process. It provides a degree of stability for essential communication needs during the critical period following the disaster declaration. However, if recovery efforts extend beyond this period, a new procurement or contract extension would be necessary, potentially introducing further delays or cost considerations.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite) › Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite)

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › IT AND TELECOM - NETWORK

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2550 DENALI ST STE 1000, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,573

Exercised Options: $8,207

Current Obligation: $8,207

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline