Treasury's IRS awards $14.7M non-competitive contract for industrial machinery to Laducer and Associates, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,684,997 ($14.7M)

Contractor: Laducer and Associates, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of the Treasury

Start Date: 2008-03-21

End Date: 2009-12-31

Contract Duration: 650 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.6K/day

Competition Type: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: DATA CONVERSION OF CTR DOCUMENTS

Place of Performance

Location: MANDAN, MORTON County, NORTH DAKOTA, 58554

State: North Dakota Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Treasury obligated $14.7 million to LADUCER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. for work described as: DATA CONVERSION OF CTR DOCUMENTS Key points: 1. Significant spending on industrial machinery for the IRS. 2. Lack of competition raises concerns about price discovery. 3. Contract duration of over 1.5 years. 4. Potential for better value through competitive bidding.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $14.7 million for industrial machinery is substantial. Without competitive data, it's difficult to assess if this price is reasonable compared to similar contracts or market rates.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This was a non-competitive delivery order, meaning the IRS did not solicit bids from multiple vendors. This limits price discovery and may lead to higher costs than if competition were present.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure on pricing for this industrial machinery.

Public Impact

Government reliance on specific vendors can limit access to innovative solutions. Non-competitive contracts can be perceived as less transparent. Ensuring fair pricing for taxpayer-funded procurements is crucial.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for overpayment
Limited vendor options

Positive Signals

Specific need addressed
Contract awarded to a single entity

Sector Analysis

The 'All Other Industrial Machinery Manufacturing' sector encompasses a wide range of equipment. Government spending in this area can vary significantly based on agency needs, with benchmarks often dependent on the specific type of machinery procured.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not awarded to a small business. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses were excluded or if the nature of the requirement precluded their participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The non-competitive nature of this award warrants scrutiny to ensure the IRS received fair value and that the procurement process was justified. Oversight should focus on the rationale for sole-sourcing.

Related Government Programs

All Other Industrial Machinery Manufacturing
Department of the Treasury Contracting
Internal Revenue Service Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of price competition
Potential for inflated costs
Limited transparency in pricing
No small business participation indicated

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Treasury awarded $14.7 million to LADUCER AND ASSOCIATES, INC.. DATA CONVERSION OF CTR DOCUMENTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LADUCER AND ASSOCIATES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-03-21. End: 2009-12-31.

What was the specific industrial machinery procured, and why was a sole-source award deemed necessary?

The specific industrial machinery is not detailed in the provided data. A sole-source award is typically justified when only one vendor can meet the agency's unique requirements, often due to proprietary technology, urgent needs, or lack of market availability. A thorough justification would be required to validate this decision.

What steps were taken to ensure the $14.7 million price was fair and reasonable without competition?

Without competitive bids, ensuring price reasonableness is challenging. The agency likely relied on market research, historical pricing data, or cost analysis of the contractor's proposal. However, the absence of competing offers means there's no direct market validation of the price.

What is the long-term impact of awarding such a significant contract non-competitively on future procurement strategies?

Repeated non-competitive awards can signal a lack of market engagement or an over-reliance on specific contractors. This can stifle innovation, reduce competition over time, and potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers. Agencies should periodically review sole-source justifications.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Industrial Machinery Manufacturing › All Other Industrial Machinery Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 201 MISSOURI DR, MANDAN, ND, 58554

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $23,852,238

Exercised Options: $23,113,851

Current Obligation: $14,684,997

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS25F0169M

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline