DoD's $35M Telecommunications Contract Awarded to Undisclosed Foreign Entities via Purchase Order
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $35,130,216 ($35.1M)
Contractor: Foreign Awardees (undisclosed)
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2010-09-30
End Date: 2015-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,826 days
Daily Burn Rate: $19.2K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: IT
Official Description: AFGNW000179 (CSA) TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE ORDERED UNDER BASIC AGREEMENT HC102112H2013
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $35.1 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: AFGNW000179 (CSA) TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE ORDERED UNDER BASIC AGREEMENT HC102112H2013 Key points: 1. Significant spending on telecommunications services, totaling $35.1M. 2. Lack of disclosed foreign awardees raises transparency concerns. 3. Contract awarded under a basic agreement, suggesting potential for broader use. 4. The 'Not Competed' status indicates a lack of competitive bidding. 5. Wired Telecommunications Carriers sector spending is substantial.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The total award amount of $35.1M for telecommunications services over 5 years needs comparison to similar contracts. Without knowing the specific services and the foreign awardees' cost structures, it's difficult to assess if this price is competitive.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was 'Not Competed,' indicating a limited competition approach, likely due to the use of a basic agreement. This lack of competition may have limited price discovery and potentially led to higher costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition and undisclosed foreign awardees may result in taxpayers not receiving the best possible value for these essential telecommunications services.
Public Impact
Taxpayers may be overpaying for telecommunications services due to a lack of competition. National security implications arise from awarding telecommunications contracts to undisclosed foreign entities. The Defense Information Systems Agency's procurement process for this critical service warrants further scrutiny.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Undisclosed foreign awardees
- Not competed
- Lack of transparency in awardee identity
Positive Signals
- Awarded under a basic agreement, potentially streamlining future procurements
- Firm fixed price contract type
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Wired Telecommunications Carriers sector, which is crucial for government operations. Spending benchmarks for similar telecommunications services procured by the DoD are essential for evaluating value.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this procurement, as it was awarded to foreign entities under a basic agreement and not competed.
Oversight & Accountability
The 'Not Competed' status and the awarding to undisclosed foreign entities suggest potential gaps in oversight. Further investigation into the justification for limited competition and the vetting of foreign awardees is needed.
Related Government Programs
- Wired Telecommunications Carriers
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Defense Information Systems Agency Programs
Risk Flags
- Lack of competition
- Undisclosed awardees
- Potential for inflated pricing
- National security concerns
- Limited transparency
Tags
wired-telecommunications-carriers, department-of-defense, purchase-order, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $35.1 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). AFGNW000179 (CSA) TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE ORDERED UNDER BASIC AGREEMENT HC102112H2013
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Information Systems Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $35.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2010-09-30. End: 2015-09-30.
What was the specific justification for not competing this telecommunications contract, and how was the pricing determined to be fair and reasonable?
The justification for not competing this contract is not provided in the data. Typically, non-competitive awards require a detailed justification, such as a sole-source requirement or urgent need. Without this information, it's impossible to assess the fairness and reasonableness of the pricing, which is a critical aspect of government spending accountability.
What are the potential security risks associated with awarding a significant telecommunications contract to undisclosed foreign entities?
Awarding telecommunications contracts to undisclosed foreign entities poses significant security risks, including potential data breaches, espionage, and disruption of critical communication lines. The lack of transparency makes it difficult to assess the trustworthiness and security protocols of the awardees, potentially compromising sensitive government information and operations.
How effective is the current procurement process in ensuring value for money when dealing with foreign awardees in the telecommunications sector?
The effectiveness of the current process is questionable given the lack of competition and undisclosed foreign awardees. Ensuring value for money requires robust competition and transparency. When these elements are absent, especially with foreign entities, the government risks overpaying and compromising security, indicating a need for improved oversight and competitive strategies.
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: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $35,130,216
Exercised Options: $35,130,216
Current Obligation: $35,130,216
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM
Timeline
Start Date: 2010-09-30
Current End Date: 2015-09-30
Potential End Date: 2015-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2021-08-20
More Contracts from Foreign Awardees (undisclosed)
- Supply of Fuel to Various Locations in Afghanistan — $889.5M (Department of Defense)
- A-Temp ANP Award — $444.1M (Department of Defense)
- Supply of Fuel to Bagram AIR Field, Afghanistant — $289.5M (Department of Defense)
- Delivery of Fuel in Afghanistan — $237.0M (Department of Defense)
- Turbine Fuel for Forward Operating Base (FOB) Sharana — $204.3M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)