Radio & TV Broadcasting Equipment Contract Awarded Without Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $0 ($0)
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Place of Performance
Location: ROCHESTER, MONROE County, NEW YORK
Plain-Language Summary
A federal agency obligated N/A to a contractor for work described as: Key points: 1. Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment. 2. The sector for broadcasting equipment manufacturing is mature, suggesting competitive pricing should be achievable. 3. No small business participation was noted, potentially missing opportunities for economic inclusion. 4. The contract's value and duration are not specified, hindering a full risk assessment.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to assess if the price reflects fair market value. The absence of benchmarks makes it impossible to determine if the awarded price is reasonable compared to similar contracts.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was not competed, indicating a potential limitation in the procurement process. This lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than could have been achieved through a more open solicitation.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds may have been spent inefficiently due to the absence of competitive pressure to secure the best possible price.
Public Impact
Potential for inflated costs due to lack of competition. Limited visibility into the specific equipment procured and its necessity. Missed opportunity to support small businesses in the broadcasting equipment sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition
- No specified value or duration
- No small business participation
Positive Signals
- Firm Fixed Price contract type can offer cost certainty if priced competitively.
Sector Analysis
The Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing sector (NAICS 334220) is characterized by established players and technological advancements. Spending benchmarks are typically driven by market competition and innovation.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates no small business participation in this contract. This suggests a missed opportunity to leverage small businesses within the broadcasting equipment manufacturing industry, potentially limiting economic diversity and innovation.
Oversight & Accountability
The lack of competition and absence of key contract details (value, duration) present challenges for effective oversight. Accountability for ensuring fair pricing and value for taxpayer money is diminished without a competitive process.
Related Government Programs
- Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing
Risk Flags
- Lack of competition
- Potential for price inflation
- No small business participation
- Unspecified contract value
- Unspecified contract duration
Tags
radio-and-television-broadcasting-and-wi, under-100k
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
the awarding agency awarded N/A to the contractor. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is the contractor.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: the awarding agency.
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is N/A.
What was the justification for not competing this contract, and how was the price determined to be fair and reasonable?
The justification for not competing the contract is crucial for understanding the procurement strategy. Without this information, it's impossible to assess if the government received the best value. Price reasonableness typically relies on market research and competitive bids, both of which appear to be absent here, raising significant concerns about potential overspending.
What are the specific risks associated with procuring broadcasting equipment without competition?
Procuring specialized equipment like broadcasting technology without competition carries risks of inflated pricing, suboptimal equipment selection, and vendor lock-in. Without market validation, the government might overpay or acquire technology that is not the most advanced or cost-effective, potentially leading to higher lifecycle costs and reduced operational efficiency.
How does the lack of competition impact the long-term effectiveness and cost-efficiency of the acquired broadcasting equipment?
The lack of competition can negatively impact long-term effectiveness and cost-efficiency. Without competitive pressure, the selected vendor may have less incentive to provide ongoing support, upgrades, or competitive pricing for future needs. This can lead to higher maintenance costs and potentially outdated technology, diminishing the overall value and utility of the investment.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Communications Equipment Manufacturing › Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Solicitation ID: N0003920R0090
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: L3harris Technologies, Inc
Address: 1680 UNIVERSITY AVE, ROCHESTER, NY, 14610
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $76,888,345
Exercised Options: $76,888,345
Current Obligation: $0
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N0003922D0070
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Potential End Date: 2025-12-16 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-05-21