DoD's $10.1M contract for miscellaneous items awarded to Towne Group Inc. raises value and competition questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,093,584 ($10.1M)

Contractor: Towne Group Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-09-02

End Date: 2009-03-31

Contract Duration: 2,037 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200312!002692!9700!ZP13 !T-ASA, MARCH CONTRACTING OFFICE !HQ002803C0001 !A!N! !N! !20030902!20040930!121268671!121268671!121268671!N!TOWNE GROUP !3510 ROSEMARY LANE !WEST FRIENDSHI !MD!21794!01000!510!51!ALEXANDRIA !ALEXANDRIA (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000001308006!N!N!000000000000!9999!MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME!1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !512191!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!004!K! !Z!N!Z! ! !Y!B!N!N! ! !Z! !B!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! !HQ0012!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: COLUMBIA, HOWARD County, MARYLAND, 21046, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.1 million to TOWNE GROUP INC. for work described as: 200312!002692!9700!ZP13 !T-ASA, MARCH CONTRACTING OFFICE !HQ002803C0001 !A!N! !N! !20030902!20040930!121268671!121268671!121268671!N!TOWNE GROUP !3510 ROSEMARY LANE !WEST FRIENDSHI !MD!21794!01000!510!51!ALEXANDRIA !ALEXANDRIA (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000001308006!N!N!000000000000!9999… Key points: 1. The contract's value proposition is unclear due to a lack of detailed performance metrics and comparable pricing data. 2. Competition was limited, raising concerns about potential price inflation and reduced market responsiveness. 3. The contract carries risks related to undefined performance standards and potential overpricing. 4. Spending on miscellaneous items lacks specific performance context, making it difficult to assess effectiveness. 5. This contract falls within the broader 'Miscellaneous Items' category, offering limited insight into specific sector positioning.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total award amount of $10.1 million for miscellaneous items is substantial, but without clear performance metrics or a breakdown of specific goods/services, it's difficult to benchmark value. The contract duration of over 5 years also suggests a need for robust price justification. Comparing this to similar broad 'miscellaneous items' contracts is challenging due to the lack of specificity. The absence of detailed cost breakdowns or unit pricing makes it hard to assess if the pricing is competitive or reflects fair market value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which suggests a limited competition environment. While not a sole-source award, the exclusion of certain sources implies that the full spectrum of potential bidders was not considered. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the description indicates a restricted approach to competition, which can hinder optimal price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition can mean taxpayers may not be getting the best possible price for the goods and services procured. It also suggests a missed opportunity to foster broader market engagement and innovation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the contractor, Towne Group Inc., which receives significant funding. The services delivered are broadly categorized as 'Miscellaneous Items,' lacking specific detail on what was provided. The geographic impact is centered around the contractor's location in Maryland, with potential distribution across DoD facilities. Workforce implications are likely within Towne Group Inc. and its supply chain, but specific numbers are not provided.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value and effectiveness of the procured items.
The 'limited' competition raises concerns about potential price gouging and reduced incentive for cost efficiency.
The broad categorization of 'Miscellaneous Items' obscures the actual nature and necessity of the spending.
Long contract duration without clear performance benchmarks increases the risk of cost overruns or underperformance.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded to a specific entity, Towne Group Inc., indicating a clear vendor relationship.
The award was made by the Department of Defense, a major federal agency with established procurement processes.
The contract has a defined start and end date, providing a clear timeframe for service delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the broad category of 'Miscellaneous Items,' which is not a distinct industry sector but rather a catch-all for various supplies and equipment. The market for such items is vast and fragmented, encompassing numerous suppliers. Benchmarking spending in this area is difficult without knowing the specific nature of the items procured. However, the Department of Defense is a significant purchaser of a wide array of goods, making even 'miscellaneous' spending substantial in aggregate.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The focus appears to be on larger-scale procurement, potentially through established vendors rather than targeted small business engagement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not explicitly detailed in the provided data. However, as a Department of Defense contract, it would typically fall under the purview of the DoD Inspector General for audits and investigations. Transparency is limited by the broad categorization of 'Miscellaneous Items' and the lack of detailed performance reporting. Accountability would primarily rest with Towne Group Inc. to deliver the contracted items as per the agreement.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules
Department of Defense Supply Chain Management
Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS)
Procurement of Office Supplies
Procurement of Maintenance, Repair, and Operating (MRO) Supplies

Risk Flags

Lack of Specificity in Contract Scope
Limited Competition Concerns
Absence of Performance Metrics
Difficulty in Value Assessment
Potential for Overpricing

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.1 million to TOWNE GROUP INC.. 200312!002692!9700!ZP13 !T-ASA, MARCH CONTRACTING OFFICE !HQ002803C0001 !A!N! !N! !20030902!20040930!121268671!121268671!121268671!N!TOWNE GROUP !3510 ROSEMARY LANE !WEST FRIENDSHI !MD!21794!01000!510!51!ALEXANDRIA !ALEXANDRIA (CITY) !VIRGINIA !+000001308006!N!N!000000000000!9999!MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME!1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !512191!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!004!K! !Z!N!Z! ! !Y!B!N!N! ! !Z! !B!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! !HQ0012!0001! !

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TOWNE GROUP INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Media Activity).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-09-02. End: 2009-03-31.

What specific types of 'miscellaneous items' were procured under this contract, and what was their intended use?

The provided data categorizes the procurement under '512191 - Miscellaneous Items' and 'C9E - ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPME'. This broad classification lacks specificity regarding the actual goods or services acquired. Without further details, it is impossible to determine the intended use, whether they were office supplies, specialized equipment, or other materials. This ambiguity hinders a thorough assessment of the contract's necessity and value. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work or detailed line items would be required to answer this question.

How does the per-unit cost of items procured under this contract compare to market rates or similar government contracts?

The provided data does not contain sufficient detail to perform a per-unit cost analysis. The total award amount is $10,093,583.91, but there is no information on the quantity or specific nature of the 'miscellaneous items' purchased. Without knowing what was bought and in what quantities, it is impossible to calculate or compare per-unit costs. Benchmarking against market rates or similar government contracts is therefore not feasible with the current data. This lack of cost transparency is a significant limitation in assessing value for money.

What is the track record of Towne Group Inc. in fulfilling similar government contracts, particularly those involving 'miscellaneous items'?

The provided data identifies Towne Group Inc. as the contractor for this $10.1 million award. However, it does not offer insights into their past performance on similar contracts. To assess their track record, one would need to examine historical contract awards to Towne Group Inc., their performance ratings on those contracts (if available), and any past issues or successes. Without this historical context, it is difficult to gauge their reliability and capability in delivering the 'miscellaneous items' required under this specific award.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the success of this contract?

The provided data does not specify any key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics for evaluating the success of this contract. The broad categorization of 'Miscellaneous Items' makes it inherently difficult to define measurable performance standards. Typically, successful contract execution would involve metrics related to delivery timeliness, quality of goods, adherence to specifications, and cost control. The absence of such defined metrics in the available data suggests a potential weakness in performance management and oversight for this contract.

How does the total spending on 'miscellaneous items' by the Department of Defense, or specifically the Defense Media Activity, compare to previous fiscal years?

The provided data pertains to a single contract award and does not offer historical spending trends for 'miscellaneous items' by the Department of Defense or the Defense Media Activity. To assess historical patterns, one would need access to broader federal procurement databases (like FPDS) covering multiple fiscal years. This would allow for an analysis of whether spending in this category has increased, decreased, or remained stable over time, and whether this specific contract represents a deviation from established spending levels.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Motion Picture and Video Industries › Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7355 HIDDEN COVE, COLUMBIA, MD, 21046

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline