Health and Human Services awards $178K for hepatic artery infusion pump, raising questions on competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $178,079 ($178.1K)

Contractor: Intera Oncology Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2026-04-13

End Date: 2027-04-12

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $489/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Healthcare

Official Description: INTERA 3000 HEPATIC ARTERY INFUSION PUMP

Place of Performance

Location: NEWTON CENTER, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02459

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $178,079 to INTERA ONCOLOGY INC for work described as: INTERA 3000 HEPATIC ARTERY INFUSION PUMP Key points: 1. The contract value appears modest, but the lack of competition warrants scrutiny for potential overpricing. 2. The sole-source nature of this award limits opportunities for market-driven price discovery. 3. Performance risk is moderate given the single-year duration and established product type. 4. This award falls within the Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing sector, a critical area for healthcare. 5. The contract's positioning is as a direct purchase, bypassing broader competitive vehicles.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this specific hepatic artery infusion pump is challenging without comparable contract data. However, the absence of competition for a $178,079 purchase order suggests potential for inflated pricing. A competitive process would typically yield better price discovery and potentially lower costs for taxpayers. The firm-fixed-price structure offers some cost certainty, but the overall value proposition is weakened by the lack of market validation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed. This approach is typically used when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services. The lack of competition means that multiple bidders were not considered, which can limit price negotiation and potentially lead to higher costs than if the contract had been openly competed. The rationale for the sole-source award needs further examination to ensure it was justified.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers do not benefit from the cost savings that can arise from competitive bidding. This can result in paying a premium for goods or services that might be available at a lower price through a more open procurement process.

Public Impact

Patients requiring hepatic artery infusion therapy will benefit from access to necessary medical equipment. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) will receive the surgical and medical instrument. The primary geographic impact is within Massachusetts, where the contractor is located. The contract supports the manufacturing workforce within the medical instrument industry.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competitive bidding may lead to suboptimal pricing.
Sole-source justification requires thorough review to ensure necessity.
Limited transparency into the selection process due to non-competitive award.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award supports a critical medical need for patient treatment.
Contract duration is relatively short, allowing for future re-evaluation.

Sector Analysis

The Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing sector is a vital component of the healthcare industry, encompassing the design, production, and distribution of devices used in medical procedures. This contract for a hepatic artery infusion pump fits within this sector, addressing a specific clinical need. Spending in this area is driven by technological advancements and the demand for improved patient outcomes. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to ascertain without more specific product details and market analysis, but the overall market for medical devices is substantial.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve a small business set-aside, as the contractor is listed as 'INTERA ONCOLOGY INC'. There is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The lack of small business participation in this specific award does not necessarily reflect the broader impact on the small business ecosystem, but it highlights a missed opportunity for direct engagement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health. As a purchase order, it is subject to internal agency controls and financial management systems. 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

Medical Equipment Procurement
Surgical Instruments
Oncology Support Services
Federal Healthcare Spending

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $178,079 to INTERA ONCOLOGY INC. INTERA 3000 HEPATIC ARTERY INFUSION PUMP

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is INTERA ONCOLOGY INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (National Institutes of Health).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $178,079.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-13. End: 2027-04-12.

What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was awarded as 'NOT COMPETED' and is a 'sole-source' type. Federal procurement regulations allow for sole-source awards under specific circumstances, such as when only one responsible source is available, or in cases of urgent and compelling need. Without further documentation from the agency (Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health), the precise justification remains unclear. Typically, agencies must document why a full and open competition was not feasible. This could involve market research indicating a lack of other qualified vendors, unique capabilities of the sole provider, or specific technical requirements that only one entity can meet. The absence of this documentation in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the validity of the sole-source determination and its impact on value for money.

How does the price of this infusion pump compare to similar products in the market?

Directly comparing the price of this INTERA 3000 HEPATIC ARTERY INFUSION PUMP to similar products is challenging with the provided data alone. The contract value is $178,079 for a 364-day duration. However, without knowing the exact specifications, quantity, and any included services (like maintenance or training), a precise benchmark is difficult. Furthermore, the sole-source nature of the award means there was no competitive bidding to establish a market-driven price. To conduct a thorough comparison, one would need to: 1) Identify comparable infusion pumps from other manufacturers. 2) Obtain pricing information for those pumps, ideally through publicly available contract data (e.g., GSA schedules, other agency awards) or manufacturer price lists. 3) Factor in differences in features, capabilities, and support. Given the lack of competition, there is a risk that the price paid is higher than what could have been achieved through a competitive process.

What is the track record of INTERA ONCOLOGY INC in fulfilling federal contracts?

The provided data indicates that INTERA ONCOLOGY INC is the contractor for this award. To assess their track record with federal contracts, one would typically need to consult federal procurement databases like SAM.gov or FPDS. These databases would show a history of awards, contract types, performance information (if available), and any past performance issues. Without access to this broader contract history, it's impossible to definitively state their track record. However, the fact that they were awarded this contract suggests they have met some basic eligibility requirements. For a comprehensive assessment, a review of their past performance ratings on similar contracts, their history of on-time delivery, and any documented disputes or terminations would be necessary. The current award being sole-source limits the insight into their ability to compete effectively against others.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for medical equipment?

Sole-source awards for medical equipment carry several potential risks. Firstly, the most significant risk is financial: without competition, the government may pay a higher price than necessary, leading to inefficient use of taxpayer funds. Secondly, there's a risk of limited innovation; relying on a single supplier can stifle the adoption of newer, potentially better technologies that might be offered by competitors. Thirdly, dependency on a single source can create supply chain vulnerabilities. If the sole provider experiences production issues, financial difficulties, or decides to discontinue the product, the government may face significant disruption in obtaining critical medical equipment. Finally, the lack of transparency inherent in sole-source procurements can raise concerns about fairness and potential conflicts of interest, although this is mitigated by agency oversight.

How does this contract fit into the broader spending patterns for surgical and medical instruments at HHS?

This contract, valued at $178,079 for an infusion pump, represents a small fraction of the overall spending within the Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing sector by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). HHS, through agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is a major purchaser of medical devices and instruments. Annual spending in this category across the federal government can run into billions of dollars. This specific award is likely for a particular clinical or research need at NIH. To understand its place in broader patterns, one would analyze historical HHS spending on similar instruments, identify trends in device procurement (e.g., shift towards digital health, specific surgical tools), and assess the proportion of spending allocated to sole-source versus competitively awarded contracts within this sector. This $178K award, being sole-source, might be an outlier or indicative of specific niche requirements.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing › Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: INSTRUMENTS AND LABORATORY EQPT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 75N98026Q00079

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 180 WELLS AVE STE 300A, NEWTON, MA, 02459

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $404,725

Exercised Options: $178,079

Current Obligation: $178,079

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline