DoD's $15.5M contract for communication equipment awarded to Morgan Franklin Corporation shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,465,501 ($15.5M)

Contractor: Morganfranklin Consulting, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-04-29

End Date: 2008-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,250 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200512!051148!9700!HC1047!DISA, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION !GS00F0033L !C!N! !N!HC104705F4306! !20050429!20050930!049003812!049003812!049003812!N!MORGANFRANKLIN CORPORATION !2325 DULLES CORNER BLVD ST!HERNDON !VA!20171!36648!059!51!HERNDON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000001658463!N!N!000000000000!5895!MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541330!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Y!B!N!N! ! ! ! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22304

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.5 million to MORGANFRANKLIN CONSULTING, LLC for work described as: 200512!051148!9700!HC1047!DISA, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION !GS00F0033L !C!N! !N!HC104705F4306! !20050429!20050930!049003812!049003812!049003812!N!MORGANFRANKLIN CORPORATION !2325 DULLES CORNER BLVD ST!HERNDON !VA!20171!36648!059!51!HERNDON !FAIR… Key points: 1. The contract's value appears high relative to its duration and scope, warranting further scrutiny. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are unclear, potentially impacting price discovery and taxpayer value. 3. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests cost risks are borne by the contractor, but overall value needs assessment. 4. Performance context is limited, making it difficult to benchmark against similar procurements. 5. This contract falls within the broader IT and Defense sectors, specifically related to communication equipment. 6. The lack of small business involvement raises questions about broader economic impact.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $15,465,501.08 for a period of approximately 1250 days (from April 29, 2005, to September 30, 2008) suggests a daily burn rate of roughly $12,372. While the specific services rendered are not detailed, this rate for communication equipment procurement seems substantial. Without comparable contract data or detailed service breakdowns, it's challenging to definitively benchmark the value. However, the relatively long duration for a fixed-price contract could indicate a stable, well-defined requirement, but also raises questions about potential overestimation of needs or market price fluctuations over time.

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 offers. However, the data does not specify the number of bids received or the evaluation process. A full and open competition is generally preferred as it maximizes the pool of potential offerors and is expected to drive competitive pricing. The absence of details on the number of bidders makes it difficult to assess the intensity of the competition and its likely impact on the final price.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is the most advantageous for taxpayers as it theoretically leads to the best prices through market forces. However, without knowing how many bids were actually received and evaluated, the true benefit to taxpayers cannot be fully determined.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) in the National Capital Region. The contract is for miscellaneous communication equipment, supporting critical defense communication infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated within the National Capital Region, supporting military operations and command functions. Workforce implications are likely related to the installation, maintenance, or operation of the communication equipment procured.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for overpricing due to lack of detailed competition metrics.
Uncertainty regarding the specific performance metrics and their achievement.
The long contract duration might not reflect current technological needs or market prices.
Limited transparency on the specific type and quantity of communication equipment procured.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a broad market search.
Firm Fixed Price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
The contractor, Morgan Franklin Corporation, has a track record with government contracts.
The contract supports critical defense communication infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the broader Information Technology and Defense sectors, specifically focusing on the procurement of communication equipment. The market for defense communication systems is substantial, driven by the need for secure and reliable networks for military operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other DoD contracts for similar equipment, considering factors like quantity, specifications, and delivery timelines. The size of this contract, approximately $15.5 million, places it as a mid-tier procurement within the defense electronics and communication equipment category.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the procurement was open to all responsible contractors, including large businesses. Consequently, there is no direct analysis of subcontracting opportunities for small businesses stemming from this specific award. The lack of a small business set-aside means that the primary impact on the small business ecosystem would be indirect, through potential competition or partnerships with the prime contractor, rather than through mandated subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Defense and the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA). As a firm fixed-price contract, performance monitoring would focus on delivery and adherence to specifications. Accountability measures would be tied to the contract terms and conditions, with potential for penalties or remedies for non-performance. Transparency is facilitated by contract databases like FPDS, which provide basic award information, but detailed performance reports or Inspector General investigations are not publicly detailed here.

Related Government Programs

Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Contracts
Department of Defense Communication Equipment Procurements
Information Technology Services for Defense
Federal Procurement of Electronic and Communication Equipment

Risk Flags

Potential for inflated pricing due to unclear competition intensity.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Contract duration may exceed the useful life or relevance of the technology procured.
Limited information on specific equipment details and their market value.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.5 million to MORGANFRANKLIN CONSULTING, LLC. 200512!051148!9700!HC1047!DISA, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION !GS00F0033L !C!N! !N!HC104705F4306! !20050429!20050930!049003812!049003812!049003812!N!MORGANFRANKLIN CORPORATION !2325 DULLES CORNER BLVD ST!HERNDON !VA!20171!36648!059!51!HERNDON !FAIRFAX !VIRGINIA !+000001658463!N!N!000000000000!5895!MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !* !541330!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MORGANFRANKLIN CONSULTING, 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 $15.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-04-29. End: 2008-09-30.

What specific types of communication equipment were procured under this contract, and what were their intended uses?

The contract identifies the product service code (PSC) as '5895' for Miscellaneous Communication Equipment and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as '541330' for Engineering Services. While the PSC '5895' broadly covers communication, detection, and coherent radiation equipment, it does not specify the exact items. Given the awardee is Morgan Franklin Corporation, known for consulting and IT services, and the agency is DISA, the equipment likely supported command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) systems. The intended uses would be to enhance or maintain the operational communication capabilities for the Department of Defense within the National Capital Region, potentially including tactical radios, satellite communication components, or network infrastructure hardware.

How does the $15.5 million award compare to other similar procurements for communication equipment by the DoD during that period?

Comparing the $15.5 million award to other similar procurements requires access to historical contract databases and filtering for comparable items (e.g., PSC 5895, relevant NAICS codes) and agencies (DoD components) within the 2005-2008 timeframe. Without direct access to such a comparative dataset, a precise benchmark is difficult. However, $15.5 million for a contract spanning over three years (1250 days) for communication equipment is a significant sum. It suggests either a large quantity of equipment, high-value specialized systems, or extensive integration and engineering services bundled with the hardware. The daily rate of approximately $12,372 would need to be assessed against market prices for similar equipment and services at the time to determine if it represents good value for money.

What was the track record of Morgan Franklin Corporation with DoD contracts prior to or around the time of this award?

Morgan Franklin Corporation, prior to and around the 2005-2008 period, had established a presence in the federal contracting space, particularly within the Department of Defense and other civilian agencies. Their primary focus was often on management consulting, financial services, and IT support. While they may not have been a primary manufacturer of communication hardware, they could have been contracted for the integration, engineering, implementation, or management of communication systems. Examining their contract history during that period would reveal the extent of their involvement in similar technology procurements and their performance on those contracts, which could provide context for this specific award.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract of this magnitude and duration?

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally preferred for their cost certainty. However, risks exist, especially for large, long-duration contracts like this one ($15.5M over ~3.5 years). One primary risk is that the contractor may have overestimated costs, leading to excessive profits if they executed efficiently. Conversely, if the initial cost estimate was too low or unforeseen issues arose (e.g., material cost increases, technical challenges), the contractor could incur losses, potentially impacting their ability or motivation to perform. For the government, the risk lies in potentially paying a premium for the certainty and in ensuring the contractor maintains quality and delivery schedules without cutting corners to maximize profit. Scope creep, if not managed tightly, can also become problematic under FFP.

How did the 'full and open competition' process translate into actual price discovery for this specific contract?

The term 'full and open competition' indicates that the solicitation was broadly advertised, allowing any responsible contractor to submit a bid. Effective price discovery occurs when this competition leads to multiple, well-qualified bidders submitting competitive offers, driving the price down towards the lowest reasonable cost. However, the data provided does not specify the number of bids received. If only a few bids were submitted, or if the bidders were not closely matched in capability, the price discovery might have been less robust than ideal. Without knowing the number of bidders and the range of their proposed prices, it's impossible to definitively state how well the competition process served price discovery for this $15.5 million contract.

What is the significance of the NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services) being associated with a contract for communication equipment?

The association of NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services) with a contract for communication equipment (PSC 5895) suggests that the procurement likely involved more than just the simple purchase of hardware. Engineering services in this context could encompass a range of activities such as system design, integration, installation, testing, technical support, project management, and potentially research and development related to the communication systems. This implies that the government was not just buying off-the-shelf equipment but was procuring a solution that required significant technical expertise and engineering input to meet specific defense requirements. This also means the 'value' of the contract is tied not only to the equipment cost but also to the engineering labor and expertise provided by Morgan Franklin Corporation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7900 TYSONS ONE PL STE 300, MC LEAN, VA, 22102

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00F0033L

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline