DoD's $14.45M copier lease contract with Xerox awarded under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,450,495 ($14.5M)

Contractor: Xerox Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-01-11

End Date: 2013-12-31

Contract Duration: 2,181 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: LEASE OF COPIERS

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA (CITY) County, VIRGINIA, 22331, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.5 million to XEROX CORPORATION for work described as: LEASE OF COPIERS Key points: 1. The contract represents a significant investment in office machinery rental and leasing for the Defense Logistics Agency. 2. Awarded to Xerox Corporation, the contract's duration suggests a long-term need for copier services. 3. The firm fixed-price structure indicates predictable costs for the government. 4. The use of full and open competition is a positive indicator for achieving competitive pricing. 5. The contract falls under the 'Office Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing' category, highlighting a specific operational need. 6. The contract's value, while substantial, needs to be benchmarked against similar large-scale equipment leases.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $14.45 million over approximately 5 years for copier leases is substantial. Without specific details on the number and type of machines leased, or the services included (maintenance, supplies), a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. However, the firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty. Benchmarking against similar large-scale government or commercial copier lease agreements would be necessary to determine if the pricing is competitive.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors were likely solicited and allowed to bid. This process is designed to foster a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and terms for the government. The fact that there were 3 bids received suggests a reasonable level of interest from the market for this type of requirement.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces, ensuring the government receives the best possible value for its spending on essential equipment like copiers.

Public Impact

Military personnel and civilian employees across various Department of Defense entities benefit from access to essential office equipment. The contract ensures the availability of functional copiers, supporting daily administrative and operational tasks. The geographic impact is likely widespread, covering multiple DoD installations where the leased equipment is deployed. Workforce implications include ensuring administrative staff have the necessary tools to perform their duties efficiently.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in if renewal terms are not carefully managed.
Risk of equipment obsolescence if lease terms do not align with technological advancements.
Dependence on a single vendor for maintenance and support could lead to service disruptions.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides budget predictability.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process was utilized.
Award to a well-established vendor like Xerox may indicate reliability and established support infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the 'Office Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing' sector, a segment of the broader commercial services industry. The market for office equipment leasing is competitive, with numerous providers offering a range of solutions. Government spending in this area is often driven by the need for standardized equipment across agencies and the desire to avoid large capital outlays for depreciating assets. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large federal leases for similar equipment or services.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While Xerox is a large corporation, there is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. The absence of set-aside provisions means that opportunities for small businesses to directly compete or subcontract on this specific award were likely limited, though they may participate in the broader office equipment leasing market.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) or equivalent within the Defense Logistics Agency. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring Xerox to deliver specified equipment and services. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

General Services Administration (GSA) Schedule contracts for office equipment
Other agency-specific leases for office machinery
IT equipment leasing contracts
Document management services contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of detailed performance metrics in summary data.
Need for unit cost and quantity details for thorough value analysis.
Limited insight into specific service level agreements.
Absence of small business subcontracting information.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.5 million to XEROX CORPORATION. LEASE OF COPIERS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is XEROX CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Logistics Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-01-11. End: 2013-12-31.

What is the average annual cost per copier under this contract, and how does it compare to market rates for similar leased equipment?

The total award was $14,450,494.86 over an estimated period of 2181 days (approximately 5.97 years). This averages to roughly $2,420,552 per year. To determine the per-unit cost, we would need to know the number and types of copiers leased. If, for example, 1000 copiers were leased, the average annual cost per copier would be approximately $2,420. This figure needs to be compared against industry benchmarks for leased office copiers, considering factors like copier model, features (color, speed, scanning), maintenance plans, and lease duration. Without specific unit counts and model details, a precise comparison is challenging, but this annual figure provides a starting point for value assessment.

What specific types and quantities of copiers were included in this lease agreement?

The provided data does not specify the exact types or quantities of copiers included in the lease agreement. It only indicates the total contract value and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 532420 for 'Office Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing'. To fully assess the contract's value and performance, understanding the specific equipment procured (e.g., high-volume production printers, standard office copiers, multifunction devices) and the number of units deployed across various Department of Defense locations is crucial. This information would allow for a more granular analysis of cost per unit and suitability for the intended operational needs.

How many bids were received, and what was the range of pricing offered by the competing vendors?

The contract data indicates that 3 bids were received for this solicitation. While the number of bidders (3) suggests some level of competition, the specific pricing details offered by each vendor are not publicly available in the provided summary. Knowing the pricing range would allow for a more robust analysis of whether the awarded price to Xerox Corporation represents a competitive outcome. A wide gap between the lowest bid and the awarded price, or a narrow range among bidders, could offer insights into the competitive dynamics and potential value achieved for the government.

What is the track record of Xerox Corporation in fulfilling similar large-scale government contracts for equipment leasing?

Xerox Corporation is a major, established player in the office equipment market, including leasing. They have a history of holding numerous government contracts, both federal and state, for copiers, printers, and related services. While this specific contract award of $14.45 million is significant, Xerox's extensive experience suggests they possess the infrastructure and capability to manage such agreements. A deeper dive into their past performance on similar large-scale DoD or other federal agency leases, including any past performance reviews or disputes, would provide a more comprehensive assessment of their reliability and service delivery in this context.

Are there any performance metrics or service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this contract, and how has Xerox performed against them?

The provided summary data does not include details on specific performance metrics or Service Level Agreements (SLAs) tied to this contract. Typically, large equipment lease agreements include provisions for response times for maintenance, uptime guarantees, and equipment refresh cycles. Without access to the contract's full terms and conditions, it's impossible to assess Xerox's performance against these potential SLAs. Evaluating performance would require reviewing contract deliverables, maintenance logs, user feedback, and any formal performance evaluations conducted by the contracting agency.

How does the total spending on copier leases by the Department of Defense compare to other federal agencies or previous years?

The provided data focuses solely on this specific $14.45 million contract awarded to Xerox by the Defense Logistics Agency. It does not offer comparative spending data across other federal agencies or historical spending trends for copier leases within the DoD. To understand the broader context, one would need to analyze aggregate federal procurement data (e.g., from FPDS or USAspending) to identify total government expenditure on office equipment leasing, benchmark DoD spending against agencies of similar size or mission, and track spending patterns over multiple fiscal years.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing › Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing › Office Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing

Product/Service Code: LEASE/RENT EQUIPMENT › LEASE OR RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: P.O. BOX 25074, SANTA ANA, CA, 92799

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,574,826

Exercised Options: $14,450,495

Current Obligation: $14,450,495

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS26F0062L

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline