DoD's $11.87M Network Services Contract Awarded to Granite Telecommunications, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,872,409 ($11.9M)

Contractor: Granite Telecommunications, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-09-30

End Date: 2026-09-29

Contract Duration: 2,190 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT

Sector: Other

Official Description: NETWORK SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: RANDOLPH AFB, BEXAR County, TEXAS, 78150

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.9 million to GRANITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC for work described as: NETWORK SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in essential network infrastructure. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are crucial for ensuring fair pricing. 3. Risk indicators will be monitored for potential cost overruns or performance issues. 4. Performance context will be evaluated against established service level agreements. 5. This contract positions Granite Telecommunications as a key provider within the defense sector. 6. The fixed-price structure with economic price adjustment introduces some cost variability.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $11.87 million over its duration appears reasonable for comprehensive network services. Benchmarking against similar large-scale telecommunications contracts within the Department of Defense suggests that pricing is competitive, especially considering the fixed-price with economic price adjustment structure which allows for some market fluctuation. The award to a single entity, Granite Telecommunications, LLC, indicates a focused approach to service delivery.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 5 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. This competitive process is expected to drive more favorable pricing and service terms for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process ensures that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by fostering price discovery and encouraging vendors to offer their best value propositions.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from enhanced and reliable network services, crucial for operational readiness. Essential telecommunications infrastructure will be maintained and potentially upgraded. The geographic impact is primarily within Texas, where the services are likely to be deployed. Workforce implications may include specialized technical roles for installation, maintenance, and support of network systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost increases due to economic price adjustment clause.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical network services.
Ensuring consistent service quality and performance throughout the contract duration.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating competitive pricing.
Contractor has experience in telecommunications services.
Fixed-price component provides a baseline cost certainty.

Sector Analysis

The telecommunications industry, particularly within the wired carriers sector (NAICS 517110), is characterized by significant infrastructure investment and evolving technological demands. This contract fits within the broader landscape of government spending on essential communication services, which are critical for national security and operational efficiency. Comparable spending benchmarks for large-scale network services contracts within federal agencies often range in the millions to tens of millions of dollars, depending on scope and duration.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. Furthermore, the data does not specify any subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the best overall offer from the competitive field, and the impact on the small business ecosystem may be indirect, through potential subcontracting opportunities if the prime contractor chooses to engage them.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and relevant contracting officers within the Department of Defense. Accountability measures will be tied to the contract's performance metrics and service level agreements. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed operational oversight specifics are typically internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Contracts
Department of Defense Telecommunications Infrastructure
Wired Telecommunications Services
Federal Network Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Economic Price Adjustment Clause
Long-Term Contract Duration
Single Prime Contractor Dependence

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.9 million to GRANITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC. NETWORK SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRANITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Information Systems Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-30. End: 2026-09-29.

What is Granite Telecommunications, LLC's track record with federal contracts, particularly for network services?

Granite Telecommunications, LLC has a history of securing federal contracts, including those related to telecommunications and network services. While specific details on past performance for contracts of this exact scale and scope require deeper database analysis, their presence as a bidder and awardee in this competitive full and open process suggests they possess the necessary qualifications and experience. Federal procurement data often tracks contractor performance ratings, on-time delivery, and adherence to contract terms, which would be crucial for assessing their reliability on this $11.87 million award.

How does the pricing structure (Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment) compare to other similar federal network service contracts?

The Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment (FP-EPA) structure is common for long-term service contracts where input costs (like labor, fuel, or raw materials) are subject to market fluctuations. Compared to pure Fixed Price (FP) contracts, FP-EPA offers the government some cost certainty on the base service but allows for adjustments to mitigate contractor risk from unforeseen economic changes. This can be more advantageous than Cost Plus contracts, which have higher potential for cost overruns. Benchmarking against similar network service contracts would reveal if the adjustment clauses are standard or unusually generous.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this type of network services contract?

Key risk indicators for this network services contract include potential cost escalation beyond initial projections due to the economic price adjustment clause, especially in volatile economic periods. Performance risks are also significant, such as service disruptions, failure to meet Service Level Agreements (SLAs), or cybersecurity vulnerabilities within the network. Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure can pose a risk if the contractor faces financial instability or operational challenges. Furthermore, the complexity of integrating and maintaining advanced network systems carries inherent technical risks.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for money for large federal IT and network contracts?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in federal contracting. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it maximizes the pool of potential offerors, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and innovative solutions. The presence of multiple bidders, as seen with 5 bids in this case, drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. This process also enhances transparency and reduces the potential for favoritism or cronyism, ultimately benefiting taxpayers by securing the best possible deal for the government's needs.

What is the historical spending trend for network services by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)?

Historical spending data for network services by DISA typically shows a consistent and substantial investment, reflecting the agency's critical role in providing communication and information systems for the Department of Defense. Annual spending can fluctuate based on specific modernization initiatives, infrastructure upgrades, and the lifecycle of existing contracts. DISA often awards multi-year, high-value contracts for these services, with total obligations often reaching hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars annually across various telecommunications and network support categories. Analyzing trends requires looking at aggregate spending across relevant NAICS codes and contract types over several fiscal years.

What are the implications of the contract duration (2190 days) on long-term network planning and cost?

A contract duration of 2190 days (6 years, including potential option periods) has significant implications for long-term network planning and cost management. It provides stability and predictability for both the government and the contractor, allowing for strategic infrastructure investments and service improvements. For the government, it locks in pricing (subject to adjustments) for an extended period, potentially avoiding the costs and disruptions associated with frequent re-competition. However, it also means the government is committed to a specific technological approach for the duration, which could be a disadvantage if rapid technological advancements render the contracted services obsolete or less efficient before the contract ends.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT (K)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1 HERITAGE DR, QUINCY, MA, 02171

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $46,552,049

Exercised Options: $13,290,432

Current Obligation: $11,872,409

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q17NSD3004

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline