Defense Commissary Agency awards $30.6M for flour and baking products, with limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,626,023 ($30.6M)

Contractor: General Mills Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-10-01

End Date: 2010-12-31

Contract Duration: 91 days

Daily Burn Rate: $336.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: RESALE - FLOUR AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS BAKING PRODUCTS

Place of Performance

Location: MINNEAPOLIS, HENNEPIN County, MINNESOTA, 55426

State: Minnesota Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $30.6 million to GENERAL MILLS INC for work described as: RESALE - FLOUR AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS BAKING PRODUCTS Key points: 1. Value for money is difficult to assess due to lack of detailed cost breakdowns. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a limited procurement approach, potentially impacting price discovery. 3. Risk indicators include reliance on a single source and potential for price escalation. 4. Performance context is based on a short-term delivery order, limiting long-term trend analysis. 5. Sector positioning is within the food and beverage supply chain for military personnel. 6. The contract's value is moderate within the context of federal food procurement.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more detailed cost information. The total award amount of $30.6 million for flour and miscellaneous baking products over a 91-day period suggests a significant volume of goods. However, without comparable contract data for similar product mixes or detailed cost breakdowns from the contractor, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing represents good value for money. The lack of transparency in cost components limits a thorough value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status, indicating a limited procurement approach. The specific reasons for this limitation are not detailed in the provided data. Typically, limited competition can arise from factors such as urgent needs, specialized capabilities, or existing relationships. The absence of a broad competitive process means that the Defense Commissary Agency may not have benefited from the full range of pricing and innovation that open competition could provide.

Taxpayer Impact: A limited competition approach means taxpayers may not be receiving the most cost-effective pricing available in the market. This can lead to higher overall spending for essential goods and services.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families benefit from the availability of essential baking products through commissaries. The services delivered include the supply of flour and other miscellaneous baking items. The geographic impact is primarily on military installations served by the Defense Commissary Agency. Workforce implications are minimal, as this contract focuses on goods rather than services requiring significant labor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition may result in higher prices for taxpayers.
Lack of detailed cost breakdown hinders value-for-money assessment.
Short contract duration limits long-term performance evaluation.

Positive Signals

Ensures availability of essential food items for military families.
Contract awarded to a known entity, potentially reducing supply chain risks.
Fixed-price contract provides some cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader food manufacturing and distribution sector, specifically focusing on baking ingredients. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 311211 (Flour Milling) indicates the primary industry. Federal spending in this sector supports the logistical needs of government agencies, including military commissaries. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for food supplies to military or government institutions, which can vary widely based on product type, volume, and duration.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from this particular award. The procurement likely involved larger suppliers capable of meeting the volume and specifications required by the Defense Commissary Agency.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Defense Commissary Agency's contracting officers and potentially the Department of Defense Inspector General. Accountability measures are generally established through the contract terms and conditions, including delivery schedules and product quality standards. Transparency is limited by the 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status and the lack of detailed cost breakdowns in the public data.

Related Government Programs

Defense Commissary Agency Food Procurement
Military Food Services
Federal Food Supply Chain Contracts
Commodity Procurement

Risk Flags

Limited Competition
Lack of Detailed Cost Data
Short Contract Duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $30.6 million to GENERAL MILLS INC. RESALE - FLOUR AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS BAKING PRODUCTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL MILLS INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-10-01. End: 2010-12-31.

What is the track record of General Mills Inc. in supplying the Defense Commissary Agency?

General Mills Inc. has a history of supplying various food products to government agencies, including the Defense Commissary Agency. While this specific contract was a short-term delivery order, the company's established presence in the food industry suggests a capacity to meet large-scale demands. Analyzing past performance on similar contracts, including on-time delivery rates, product quality compliance, and responsiveness to issues, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their track record. Without access to detailed performance reviews or historical data beyond this single award, a full assessment remains limited. However, their longevity as a major food producer implies a degree of reliability in fulfilling government contracts.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar federal food supply contracts?

Direct comparison of pricing for this $30.6 million contract for flour and miscellaneous baking products is difficult without access to detailed cost breakdowns and specific product specifications. Federal food supply contracts can vary significantly based on the type of goods, volume, delivery locations, and contract duration. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify contracts with similar product categories (e.g., bulk flour, baking mixes) awarded to comparable entities (e.g., other large food manufacturers) by similar agencies (e.g., other military branches, federal food programs) around the same time period. The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status also suggests that the pricing may not reflect the most competitive market rates achievable through open bidding.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' award for essential food supplies?

The primary risks associated with a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' award for essential food supplies like flour and baking products include potential overpayment due to lack of competitive pressure, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or offer cost savings, and a lack of transparency in the procurement process. Taxpayers may bear a higher cost than necessary. Furthermore, reliance on a single source, even if pre-qualified, can create vulnerabilities in the supply chain if the contractor faces production issues, quality control problems, or unforeseen disruptions. This limited competition approach bypasses the opportunity to discover potentially lower prices or superior product offerings from a wider pool of suppliers.

How effective is the Defense Commissary Agency in ensuring value for money through its procurement processes?

The effectiveness of the Defense Commissary Agency (DECA) in ensuring value for money is variable and depends heavily on the specific procurement strategy employed. For contracts that undergo full and open competition, DECA can leverage market forces to achieve competitive pricing and high-quality goods. However, as seen in this 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' award, situations arise where competition is limited. In such cases, DECA's effectiveness hinges on robust internal cost analysis, negotiation skills, and clear performance standards within the contract to mitigate risks of overpayment and ensure adequate supply. The agency's mission is to provide quality goods at savings, so value for money is a core objective, but the procurement method significantly influences the ability to achieve it.

What is the historical spending pattern for flour and baking products by the Defense Commissary Agency?

Historical spending patterns for flour and baking products by the Defense Commissary Agency are not detailed in the provided data for this specific contract. This award represents a single delivery order valued at $30.6 million over approximately three months. To understand historical spending, one would need to analyze DECA's procurement data over multiple fiscal years, looking at the total expenditure on these specific product categories, the number and types of contracts awarded (e.g., fixed-price, cost-plus), the primary contractors, and the average contract values. This would reveal trends in demand, pricing fluctuations, and the prevalence of competitive versus non-competitive awards within this product segment.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Grain and Oilseed Milling › Flour Milling

Product/Service Code: SUBSISTENCE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1 GENERAL MILLS BLVD, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55426

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: $30,626,023

Exercised Options: $30,626,023

Current Obligation: $30,626,023

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HDEC0109G3837

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline