Department of the Navy awards $30.7M contract for sporting goods, with 2 bids received

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,699,883 ($30.7M)

Contractor: Atlantic Diving Supply, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-07-18

End Date: 2013-09-30

Contract Duration: 439 days

Daily Burn Rate: $69.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: RAT BOOT (TW)

Place of Performance

Location: VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA BEACH CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23452

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $30.7 million to ATLANTIC DIVING SUPPLY, INC. for work described as: RAT BOOT (TW) Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the scope of sporting and athletic goods. 2. Limited competition suggests potential for higher pricing than a more robust bidding process. 3. Fixed-price contract type mitigates cost overrun risk for the government. 4. Contract duration of over a year indicates a sustained need for these goods. 5. The award falls within the broader category of general goods and services for military personnel. 6. Small business participation was not a stated requirement for this contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $30.7 million for sporting and athletic goods seems within a reasonable range for a federal agency's needs over the contract period. Benchmarking against similar contracts for bulk sporting equipment procurement would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract helps control costs. The awarded amount is not excessively high compared to typical government procurements of this nature.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, which is a positive indicator for price discovery. However, only two bids were received, suggesting that the market for this specific type of sporting and athletic goods procurement might be limited or that other potential bidders did not find the opportunity compelling enough to participate. The limited number of bidders could potentially lead to less aggressive pricing than if there were a larger pool of competitors.

Taxpayer Impact: While two bids are better than one, the limited competition means taxpayers may not have benefited from the most competitive pricing achievable. A broader range of bids could have driven down costs further.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families are the primary beneficiaries, gaining access to sporting and athletic equipment. The contract supports recreational activities and morale for service members. The geographic impact is likely widespread, serving various Navy installations. The contract supports jobs within the sporting goods manufacturing and distribution sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may have resulted in a higher price than a more robust bidding process.
The specific types and quantities of goods procured are not detailed, making it difficult to assess value precisely.
Potential for vendor lock-in if the awarded vendor has unique capabilities or pricing structures.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, adhering to standard procurement practices.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract duration of over a year suggests a consistent supply chain for essential goods.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader sporting and athletic goods manufacturing sector. This sector encompasses a wide range of products from apparel to equipment. Federal spending in this area typically supports military readiness, recreational programs, and sometimes educational institutions. The market size for sporting goods is substantial globally, and federal contracts represent a niche but significant portion of demand, particularly for specialized or bulk requirements.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate any specific small business set-aside. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans with small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in fulfilling this contract are not explicitly mandated, and their involvement would depend on the prime contractor's discretion.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is subject to standard federal procurement oversight mechanisms. Accountability is maintained through the firm fixed-price agreement, requiring the contractor to deliver specified goods within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases. Inspector General oversight would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules for sporting goods
Department of Defense Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) programs
Procurement of athletic equipment for military academies

Risk Flags

Limited competition may impact price competitiveness.
Lack of detailed itemization makes precise value assessment difficult.
Potential for higher costs due to only two bids received.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $30.7 million to ATLANTIC DIVING SUPPLY, INC.. RAT BOOT (TW)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ATLANTIC DIVING SUPPLY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-07-18. End: 2013-09-30.

What specific types of sporting and athletic goods were procured under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'Sporting and Athletic Goods Manufacturing' (NAICS code 339920). However, the specific items procured are not detailed in the summary. This could range from team sports equipment (like basketballs, footballs) to individual athletic gear (like running shoes, weights) or even camping and outdoor recreational equipment. Without a detailed list of goods, a precise assessment of the value and suitability of the procurement is challenging. Further review of the contract's statement of work or delivery orders would be necessary to identify the exact items.

How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar bulk sporting goods purchases?

The total contract value is $30.7 million. To compare this to market rates, one would need to identify the specific items procured and their quantities. For example, if the contract primarily involved bulk purchases of standard athletic footwear, comparing the per-unit price to wholesale or GSA schedule pricing for similar items would be informative. Given the limited competition (2 bids), the price might be higher than if more vendors had participated. A detailed price analysis would require access to the bid proposals and market research conducted by the Navy.

What are the potential risks associated with a contract having only two bidders?

A primary risk with only two bidders is reduced price competition. This can lead to the government paying a higher price than if there were a larger pool of interested and capable vendors. Another risk is that the limited competition might indicate a lack of market interest or a highly specialized niche, potentially leading to supply chain vulnerabilities if one of the two vendors faces issues. Furthermore, it could suggest that the contract requirements were overly restrictive or that the solicitation process did not effectively reach a wider audience of potential suppliers.

What is the significance of the 'Firm Fixed Price' contract type for this procurement?

The 'Firm Fixed Price' (FFP) contract type is significant because it places the primary responsibility on the contractor (ATLANTIC DIVING SUPPLY, INC.) to control costs and absorb any cost overruns. This provides the Department of the Navy with significant cost certainty. Unlike cost-reimbursement contracts, the government's liability is capped at the agreed-upon price, assuming the contractor meets all contract requirements. This type of contract is generally preferred when the scope of work is well-defined and risks are manageable, as is often the case with the procurement of tangible goods like sporting equipment.

What does the contract duration of 439 days imply about the Navy's needs?

A contract duration of 439 days (approximately 14.5 months) suggests a sustained and ongoing need for the sporting and athletic goods being procured. This is not a short-term, one-off purchase but rather indicates a requirement that spans over a year. This duration allows for more predictable budgeting and ensures a consistent supply chain for the intended users, likely military personnel. It also provides the contractor with a stable demand, potentially allowing for better inventory management and production planning.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing › Sporting and Athletic Goods Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: CLOTHING, INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT, INSIGNA, AND JEWELRY

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: ADS Tactical, Inc.

Address: 621 LYNNHAVEN PKWY STE 400, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA, 23452

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,699,883

Exercised Options: $30,699,883

Current Obligation: $30,699,883

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 2

Total Subaward Amount: $58,239,278

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS07F6072P

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline