DOE's $11.7M Verizon BPA for phone services in DC awarded without competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $11,707 ($11.7K)
Contractor: Verizon Maryland LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2015-10-01
End Date: 2016-09-30
Contract Duration: 365 days
Daily Burn Rate: $32/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF ESTABLISH A NEW BPA FOR PHONE SERVICES AT HAGERSTOWN
Place of Performance
Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20426
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $11,706.5 to VERIZON MARYLAND LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF ESTABLISH A NEW BPA FOR PHONE SERVICES AT HAGERSTOWN Key points: 1. The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about potential overpayment and lack of market-driven pricing. 2. Limited competition suggests a potential for higher costs compared to a more open bidding process. 3. The contract's duration of one year with a fixed-price structure provides cost certainty but may not reflect evolving market rates. 4. Performance is tied to a specific geographic location (District of Columbia), limiting broader applicability. 5. The absence of small business set-aside indicates no specific focus on promoting small business participation in this procurement.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
This sole-source BPA for telecommunications services at $11.7 million over one year lacks a competitive benchmark. Without comparison to other providers or similar government contracts, it is difficult to assess if the pricing is fair and reasonable. The fixed-price nature offers predictability but could mask inefficiencies or above-market rates due to the lack of competition. Further analysis would require market research on comparable telecommunications services in the District of Columbia.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded as a sole-source procurement, meaning it was not competed. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required services. The lack of competition means there were no other bidders, and therefore no direct price comparison or negotiation leverage was gained through a bidding process. This can lead to higher costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium for these services due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without multiple offers, the government had limited ability to negotiate the best possible price.
Public Impact
Federal employees in the District of Columbia benefit from reliable phone services necessary for daily operations. The contract ensures the provision of essential telecommunications infrastructure for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Geographic impact is concentrated within the District of Columbia, supporting federal agency functions in the capital. The contract supports the workforce by providing the tools needed for communication and operational efficiency.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price discovery and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
- Lack of competition may result in suboptimal service levels or innovation compared to a competitive environment.
- Fixed-price contract might not adapt to potential decreases in market rates for telecommunications services.
- No clear mechanism for performance incentives or penalties is evident from the provided data.
Positive Signals
- The contract provides essential, reliable phone services, ensuring operational continuity for the agency.
- A single-year duration allows for periodic re-evaluation of needs and potential future competition.
- Fixed-price contract offers budget certainty for the agency's telecommunications expenses.
Sector Analysis
The telecommunications sector is characterized by rapid technological advancements and evolving market dynamics. Government agencies rely heavily on telecommunications services for their operations. Spending in this sector can range from basic phone lines to complex network infrastructure and cloud-based solutions. Benchmarking this contract would involve comparing its price and scope to other federal or commercial agreements for similar voice services within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, considering factors like bandwidth, features, and service level agreements.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside. The sole-source nature of the award further indicates that small businesses were not specifically solicited or considered as primary awardees. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or opportunities for small businesses within this specific BPA.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's contracting office and potentially the Department of Energy's Inspector General. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source award, as the justification for not competing is not publicly detailed. Accountability would be measured by Verizon's adherence to the terms of the BPA and the quality of services delivered.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Telecommunications Services (FTS) contracts
- General Services Administration (GSA) schedules for telecommunications
- Agency-specific telecommunications procurements
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Lack of competition
- Potential for overpricing
- Limited transparency
Tags
telecommunications, department-of-energy, federal-energy-regulatory-commission, district-of-columbia, sole-source, bpa-call, firm-fixed-price, all-other-telecommunications, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $11,706.5 to VERIZON MARYLAND LLC. IGF::OT::IGF ESTABLISH A NEW BPA FOR PHONE SERVICES AT HAGERSTOWN
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is VERIZON MARYLAND LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $11,706.5.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2015-10-01. End: 2016-09-30.
What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' (Simplified Acquisition Procedures). While SAP allows for certain sole-source awards under specific thresholds and conditions, the exact justification for this particular sole-source award is not detailed. Typically, sole-source justifications are based on factors such as unique capabilities of the vendor, urgent and compelling needs, or when only one responsible source can provide the required services. Without further documentation, it's impossible to confirm the specific reason for bypassing competition for this $11.7 million BPA.
How does the $11.7 million value compare to similar telecommunications contracts for federal agencies?
Comparing the $11.7 million value requires context regarding the scope and duration. This BPA is for one year, suggesting an annual spend of $11.7 million. This figure is substantial for a single-year telecommunications contract, especially for basic phone services. However, if it includes advanced features, dedicated lines, or comprehensive network management for a large number of users within the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the cost might be more aligned with market rates. Without detailed service descriptions and comparisons to other agency contracts of similar scope and user base in the D.C. area, it's difficult to definitively benchmark the value.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for telecommunications services?
The primary risk of a sole-source award is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive pressure. Without competing offers, the government may not achieve the best possible price or terms. Additionally, sole-source contracts can limit access to innovative solutions or specialized services that other vendors might offer. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, making it difficult to switch providers in the future. For telecommunications, this could mean paying more than necessary for services or not benefiting from the latest technological advancements available in the market.
What is the historical spending pattern for telecommunications services at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission?
The provided data only pertains to this specific BPA awarded in 2015. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to examine prior contracts for telecommunications services awarded by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the Department of Energy (DOE) in general. Analyzing spending over several fiscal years would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, and whether services were historically competed or awarded sole-source. This analysis would help determine if this $11.7 million BPA represents an increase or decrease in spending and if it aligns with past procurement strategies.
What performance metrics or service level agreements (SLAs) are associated with this BPA?
The provided data does not include specific details on performance metrics or Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for this BPA. Typically, government contracts, especially for essential services like telecommunications, would outline specific requirements for uptime, response times, call quality, and customer support. The effectiveness of the contract and the value received are heavily dependent on these underlying performance standards and how rigorously they are monitored and enforced by the agency. Without this information, assessing the quality of service delivered is not possible.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Information › Other Telecommunications › All Other Telecommunications
Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP
Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1 E PRATT ST 8TH FL, BALTIMORE, MD, 21202
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $12,107
Exercised Options: $11,707
Current Obligation: $11,707
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: FERC14A0265
IDV Type: BPA
Timeline
Start Date: 2015-10-01
Current End Date: 2016-09-30
Potential End Date: 2016-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-04-02
More Contracts from Verizon Maryland LLC
- Establish a NEW BPA Call for Phone Services AT Hagerstown — $13.6K (Department of Energy)
- NEW BPA Call for Phone Services AT Hagerstown — $12.8K (Department of Energy)
- Verizon Institutional Phone Service FY26 Funded to CR Level, JAN 30 52.232-18 Availability of Funds — $3.1K (Department of Justice)
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)