Interior Department awards $816K Ethernet upgrade to Windstream Communications, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $8,160 ($8.2K)

Contractor: Windstream Communications, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2026-04-02

End Date: 2027-04-01

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SUPPLY: GA-OKEFENOKEE NWR-UPGRADE ETHERNET

Place of Performance

Location: LITTLE ROCK, PULASKI County, ARKANSAS, 72212

State: Arkansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $8,160 to WINDSTREAM COMMUNICATIONS, LLC for work described as: SUPPLY: GA-OKEFENOKEE NWR-UPGRADE ETHERNET Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price discovery and potentially increasing costs. 2. The contract duration of one year with a firm fixed price suggests a defined scope of work. 3. The specific service, wired telecommunications, is essential for operational continuity. 4. The award to a single vendor raises questions about market competitiveness for this specific need. 5. The small value of the contract may indicate a localized or specific upgrade rather than a broad network overhaul.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $816,000 for a one-year Ethernet upgrade is difficult to benchmark without more specific details on the scope of services and infrastructure involved. As a sole-source award, there is no direct comparison to other bids to assess value for money. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the absence of competition means the government may not have secured the most economical price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required goods or services, or in cases of urgent need. The lack of competition means there were no other bidders to compare against, potentially leading to a higher price than if the contract had been openly competed.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit opportunities for taxpayers to benefit from competitive pricing, as the government does not have multiple offers to choose from to secure the best value.

Public Impact

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will benefit from improved network infrastructure. Enhanced Ethernet connectivity will support the operational needs of the agency. The upgrade is likely to improve data transmission and communication reliability. The geographic impact is specific to the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, supporting its administrative and operational functions.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may result in suboptimal pricing.
Sole-source awards can indicate potential market limitations or specific vendor dependencies.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Award supports essential telecommunications infrastructure for a federal agency.

Sector Analysis

The telecommunications sector is characterized by significant infrastructure investment and evolving technology. Contracts for wired telecommunications services, such as Ethernet upgrades, are common across federal agencies to maintain and improve network capabilities. While the overall market is competitive, specific niche requirements or localized needs can sometimes lead to sole-source awards. The value of this contract is relatively small within the broader context of federal IT spending.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor is there information indicating subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. As a sole-source award to a specific entity, it does not directly contribute to the small business contracting ecosystem through set-aside provisions.

Oversight & Accountability

As a purchase order, oversight would typically be managed through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's contracting and financial management departments. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award. There is no specific mention of an Inspector General investigation related to this particular contract, but general oversight mechanisms for federal spending would apply.

Related Government Programs

Federal Information Technology Contracts
Telecommunications Services
Network Infrastructure Upgrades
Department of the Interior Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Limited transparency on technical scope and performance metrics.
Potential for vendor lock-in.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $8,160 to WINDSTREAM COMMUNICATIONS, LLC. SUPPLY: GA-OKEFENOKEE NWR-UPGRADE ETHERNET

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WINDSTREAM COMMUNICATIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $8,160.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-02. End: 2027-04-01.

What specific Ethernet upgrade is being performed, and what is the expected improvement in network performance?

The data indicates a need for an 'Ethernet upgrade' for the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, supplied by Windstream Communications, LLC. However, the specific technical details of the upgrade (e.g., bandwidth increase, technology standard, number of connections) and the quantifiable performance improvements are not provided in the award data. This information is crucial for understanding the necessity and impact of the $816,000 expenditure. Without these details, it's difficult to assess if the upgrade is commensurate with the investment or if it addresses critical operational bottlenecks.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis, and were alternative solutions considered?

The contract was designated as 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a sole-source award. The justification for this approach is not detailed in the provided data. Typically, sole-source awards are made when only one vendor possesses the necessary capabilities, technology, or when there's an urgent, compelling need that precludes full and open competition. It is unclear if market research was conducted to confirm Windstream Communications, LLC as the only viable provider or if other vendors were approached. This lack of competition raises concerns about potential price inflation and missed opportunities for better value.

What is the typical cost for similar Ethernet upgrade projects of this scale in federal agencies?

Benchmarking the cost of this $816,000 Ethernet upgrade is challenging without specific technical scope. However, federal IT spending data often shows a wide variance in per-project costs depending on complexity, location, and required bandwidth. For a one-year contract focused on wired telecommunications, this amount could represent a significant upgrade for a specific site or a more modest upgrade for a larger facility. Without comparable sole-source awards or details on the service level agreements, a precise cost comparison is not feasible. Generally, competitive bidding tends to drive down costs for such services.

What is Windstream Communications, LLC's track record with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of the Interior?

Windstream Communications, LLC has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily for telecommunications services. Analyzing their past performance with the Department of the Interior and other agencies would provide insight into their reliability, quality of service, and pricing competitiveness. A review of their contract history, including any past performance evaluations or disputes, would be necessary to fully assess their suitability and the potential risks associated with this award. The current data does not provide this performance context.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for essential telecommunications services?

The primary risk of a sole-source award for essential telecommunications services is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competition. Taxpayers may end up paying more than necessary. Additionally, it can create vendor lock-in, making it difficult to switch providers in the future even if better options become available. There's also a risk that the chosen vendor may not be the most innovative or efficient provider, potentially impacting the quality or reliability of the service over the long term. Oversight is critical to mitigate these risks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Information › Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite) › Wired Telecommunications Carriers

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 140F1S26Q0033

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4005 N RODNEY PARHAM RD, LITTLE ROCK, AR, 72212

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $40,800

Exercised Options: $8,160

Current Obligation: $8,160

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline