Keysight Technologies awarded $28.9M for electronic resistor manufacturing, highlighting firm fixed-price contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,948,149 ($28.9M)

Contractor: Keysight Technologies, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2010-03-05

End Date: 2011-04-15

Contract Duration: 406 days

Daily Burn Rate: $71.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SERVICE

Place of Performance

Location: WARNER ROBINS, HOUSTON County, GEORGIA, 31098

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $28.9 million to KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. for work described as: SERVICE Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract's firm fixed-price nature aims to provide cost certainty for the government. 3. Performance period spans over a year, indicating a need for sustained supply. 4. The award was made by the General Services Administration, a key procurement agency. 5. The specific product category relates to electronic resistor manufacturing. 6. The contract value is substantial, reflecting significant demand for these components.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific details on the quantity and type of electronic resistors procured. However, a $28.9 million award suggests a significant volume or high-value components. Comparing this to similar large-scale procurements for electronic components would be necessary to assess if the pricing is competitive. The firm fixed-price structure implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the price was set appropriately.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This typically leads to a more robust price discovery process as multiple vendors compete. The fact that it was competed fully suggests that the government sought the best possible pricing and technical solutions available in the market for electronic resistor manufacturing.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces, ensuring the government is not overpaying for necessary goods and services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely government agencies requiring electronic components for various systems, potentially in defense, aerospace, or communications. The service delivered is the manufacturing and supply of electronic resistors. The geographic impact is not specified but could be national if the components are used in widespread systems. Workforce implications would be within the electronics manufacturing sector, supporting jobs at the contractor's facilities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the type and quantity of resistors makes it difficult to assess value for money.
Potential for price escalation in future contracts if market conditions change significantly.
Dependence on a single contractor for a large volume of critical components could pose supply chain risks.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing was achieved.
Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
The General Services Administration's involvement indicates adherence to established procurement standards.

Sector Analysis

The electronic components sector is a critical part of the broader technology and defense industries. This contract falls under the manufacturing of passive electronic components, specifically resistors, which are fundamental building blocks in virtually all electronic devices. The market for electronic components is global and highly competitive, with significant R&D investment. Benchmarking this contract's value would require comparison against industry standards for resistor manufacturing and the scale of similar government procurements for electronic parts.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. The primary contractor, Keysight Technologies, Inc., is a large corporation, and its role in the small business ecosystem would likely be as a potential customer for specialized components or services, rather than a direct recipient of set-aside funds.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) generally has robust oversight mechanisms for its contracts, including performance monitoring and compliance checks. As a firm fixed-price contract, the primary accountability lies with the contractor to deliver the specified goods within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is usually maintained through contract award databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) procurements for electronic components
NASA contracts for aerospace electronics
Department of Defense (DoD) electronics manufacturing contracts
General Services Administration (GSA) schedule contracts for electronic parts

Risk Flags

Potential supply chain disruption risk
Lack of detailed performance metrics in provided data
Limited visibility into specific component types and quantities

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $28.9 million to KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.. SERVICE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $28.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-03-05. End: 2011-04-15.

What is the specific type and quantity of electronic resistors being procured under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact type or quantity of electronic resistors. The NationalНаименование (NAICS) code 334415, 'Electronic Resistor Manufacturing,' indicates the general industry category. To fully assess the value and appropriateness of the $28.9 million award, detailed specifications regarding the technical characteristics (e.g., resistance values, tolerance, power rating, size) and the precise number of units required would be essential. Without this granular information, it's difficult to benchmark the per-unit cost or compare it effectively to market rates for specific resistor types.

How does the $28.9 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar electronic components by the government?

Analyzing historical spending requires access to broader procurement databases. However, a $28.9 million contract for electronic resistors suggests a significant, potentially multi-year, requirement. The General Services Administration (GSA) often procures common-use items through its Federal Acquisition Service. Comparing this award to previous GSA or Department of Defense contracts for similar volumes or types of resistors would reveal trends in pricing and demand. If this represents a substantial increase or decrease compared to prior periods, it could indicate shifts in market prices, technological requirements, or government inventory strategies.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and quality assurance measures for this contract?

While the data indicates a 'Firm Fixed Price' (PT) contract type, specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and quality assurance (QA) measures are not detailed. For a contract involving manufactured components like resistors, typical KPIs would likely include on-time delivery rates, defect rates (e.g., parts per million defective), adherence to technical specifications, and warranty provisions. QA measures would involve inspection and testing protocols, potentially including source inspection by the government or third-party certification. The effectiveness of the contract hinges on the contractor's ability to meet these unstated but implied performance standards.

What is Keysight Technologies, Inc.'s track record with government contracts, particularly for electronic components?

Keysight Technologies, Inc. is a well-established company in the electronic test and measurement industry. While this specific contract is for manufacturing resistors, Keysight's broader expertise lies in sophisticated electronic equipment and software. Their track record with government contracts would need to be reviewed for performance history, past issues (e.g., contract disputes, quality problems), and overall reliability. A company with a strong history of delivering complex electronic solutions is generally a lower risk, but specific performance on component manufacturing contracts should be verified.

What is the potential risk associated with relying on a single award for this volume of electronic resistors?

Awarding a $28.9 million contract to a single entity, even if competitively won, introduces supply chain risk. If Keysight Technologies, Inc. faces production issues, labor strikes, natural disasters, or financial difficulties, the government's supply of these critical electronic resistors could be disrupted. Mitigating this risk might involve clauses for business continuity, requiring the contractor to maintain certain inventory levels, or having contingency plans for alternative sourcing. The government's strategy in awarding a large sum to one vendor suggests a belief in the contractor's capacity and reliability, but the inherent risk remains.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing › Electronic Resistor Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: ELECTRICAL/ELECTRONIC EQPT COMPNTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 4QBR57103016

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Agilent Technologies, Inc. (UEI: 084963177)

Address: 9780 S MERIDIAN BLVD, ENGLEWOOD, CO, 06

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,969,696

Exercised Options: $28,948,149

Current Obligation: $28,948,149

Contract Characteristics

Consolidated Contract: Yes

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline