Department of Defense awards $42.8M for MREs, with SO-PAK-CO, INC. as the primary contractor

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $42,841,190 ($42.8M)

Contractor: So-Pak-Co, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-06-29

End Date: 2021-02-26

Contract Duration: 242 days

Daily Burn Rate: $177.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 8507498466!MEAL, READY-TO-EAT, IND,

Place of Performance

Location: MULLINS, MARION County, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29574

State: South Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $42.8 million to SO-PAK-CO, INC for work described as: 8507498466!MEAL, READY-TO-EAT, IND, Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in sustaining operational readiness for military personnel. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are noted as 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES', suggesting a potentially complex procurement process. 3. The duration of 242 days indicates a focused, short-term need for these essential supplies. 4. The contract type is 'FIRM FIXED PRICE', which transfers cost risk to the contractor. 5. The primary contractor, SO-PAK-CO, INC., is positioned to deliver critical food services. 6. The Product Service Code '311421' points to a specialized area within food preparation and packaging.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract requires more granular data on the specific types and quantities of MREs procured. However, the $42.8 million award for a 242-day period suggests a substantial per-diem cost for feeding personnel. Without comparable contract data for similar MRE procurements, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. The firm-fixed-price structure, however, aims to control costs by shifting risk to the contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES'. This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources were excluded from the initial bidding process. The exact reasons for exclusion and the number of bidders that participated after exclusions are not detailed, making it challenging to fully assess the breadth of competition and its impact on price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, even if initially open, may have resulted in a higher price for taxpayers compared to a fully open and unrestricted competition. Understanding the rationale behind source exclusion is crucial for ensuring fair pricing.

Public Impact

Military personnel deployed domestically and internationally will benefit from the provision of ready-to-eat meals. The contract ensures the availability of essential sustenance, supporting troop morale and operational effectiveness. The primary impact is on the Department of Defense's logistical capabilities and its ability to maintain supply chains for food services. Workforce implications are primarily within the contractor's operations, focusing on food production, packaging, and logistics.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of transparency regarding the exclusion of sources in the procurement process.
Potential for reduced price competition due to source exclusions.
Limited insight into the specific components and nutritional value of the MREs procured.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract structure helps control costs.
Award to a specific contractor indicates a clear path for delivery.
Procurement addresses a critical need for operational readiness.

Sector Analysis

The defense logistics sector involves the procurement and distribution of a wide array of goods and services essential for military operations. This contract for Meals, Ready-to-Eat (MREs) falls under the food services and supplies sub-sector. The market for military rations is specialized, often requiring contractors to meet stringent quality, safety, and logistical requirements. Spending in this area is directly tied to operational tempo and troop deployment levels.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication from the provided data that this contract included a small business set-aside. The primary contractor, SO-PAK-CO, INC., is not identified as a small business. Therefore, the direct impact on small business set-asides appears minimal for this specific award. However, the potential for subcontracting opportunities with small businesses exists, depending on the contractor's sourcing and manufacturing strategy.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), responsible for ensuring compliance with contract terms, quality standards, and financial accountability. The Department of Defense's Inspector General also provides oversight for waste, fraud, and abuse. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific details of performance and compliance may be less publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Military Rations Procurement
Defense Food Services
Logistics and Supply Chain Management
Department of Defense Food Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Potential for price increases resulting from reduced competition.
Dependence on a single contractor for a critical supply.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $42.8 million to SO-PAK-CO, INC. 8507498466!MEAL, READY-TO-EAT, IND,

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SO-PAK-CO, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $42.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-06-29. End: 2021-02-26.

What is the historical spending pattern for MREs by the Defense Logistics Agency over the past five years?

Analyzing historical spending for MREs by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) over the past five years would reveal trends in demand, pricing, and contractor performance. For instance, if spending has been consistently high, it indicates a sustained need for these rations. Fluctuations could be tied to geopolitical events, troop deployments, or changes in military feeding strategies. Comparing the current $42.8 million award to previous years would help determine if this represents an increase, decrease, or average expenditure. It would also highlight any shifts in the primary contractors awarded these types of contracts, potentially indicating changes in market competition or contractor capabilities. Understanding these patterns is crucial for budget forecasting and identifying potential cost-saving opportunities.

How does the unit cost of these MREs compare to commercially available meal kits or other military ration contracts?

To assess the value for money, a comparison of the unit cost of these MREs against commercially available meal kits and other military ration contracts is essential. Commercial meal kits, while offering convenience, may not meet the stringent nutritional, shelf-life, and durability requirements of military rations. Therefore, a direct price-for-price comparison might be misleading. However, benchmarking against similar DLA or other military branch contracts for MREs awarded under comparable conditions (e.g., firm-fixed-price, full and open competition) would provide a more accurate assessment. If the unit cost here is significantly higher than historical or comparable contracts, it could indicate potential issues with pricing or competition. Conversely, if it aligns with or is lower than benchmarks, it suggests effective price negotiation or competitive pressure.

What are the specific performance metrics and quality assurance standards required for these MREs?

The performance metrics and quality assurance standards for MREs are critical to ensuring troop safety, morale, and operational readiness. These typically include detailed specifications for nutritional content (calories, macronutrients, vitamins, minerals), shelf life (often 3-5 years under specified storage conditions), packaging integrity (resistance to moisture, temperature fluctuations, and physical damage), and palatability. Quality assurance would involve rigorous testing protocols, including laboratory analysis of ingredients and finished products, sensory evaluations, and inspection of manufacturing processes. The contract likely mandates adherence to specific military standards (e.g., MIL-STD) and potentially FDA regulations for food safety. Failure to meet these standards could result in contract non-compliance, rejection of goods, and potential penalties.

What is the track record of SO-PAK-CO, INC. in fulfilling similar defense contracts, particularly for food supplies?

Evaluating the track record of SO-PAK-CO, INC. is crucial for assessing the risk associated with this $42.8 million contract. Information on their past performance, including on-time delivery rates, quality of products supplied, and any history of contract disputes or terminations, would provide valuable insights. Specifically, their experience with producing and delivering MREs or other types of military rations is highly relevant. A history of successful contract fulfillment suggests a lower risk of performance issues. Conversely, a record of deficiencies could indicate potential challenges in meeting the current contract's demands. Accessing past performance evaluations or contract databases could offer a more objective view of their capabilities and reliability as a supplier to the Department of Defense.

What are the potential risks associated with the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' procurement method for this contract?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' method, while aiming for broad competition, introduces specific risks. The primary risk lies in the potential for reduced competition if the excluded sources represent a significant portion of the capable market. This exclusion, if not adequately justified and documented, could lead to higher prices for taxpayers and limit the government's ability to secure the best value. It also raises questions about the fairness and transparency of the procurement process. Furthermore, if the remaining pool of bidders is small, there's an increased risk of contractor consolidation or a lack of innovative solutions. Understanding the rationale behind the exclusions is key to mitigating these risks and ensuring the integrity of the acquisition process.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Fruit and Vegetable Preserving and Specialty Food Manufacturing › Fruit and Vegetable Canning

Product/Service Code: SUBSISTENCE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Unaka Company, Incorporated (UEI: 003374477)

Address: 118 S CYPRESS ST, MULLINS, SC, 29574

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $42,841,190

Exercised Options: $42,841,190

Current Obligation: $42,841,190

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: SPE3S117DZ112

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline