DOJ's $8M contract for inmate property shipment awarded to UPS, highlighting courier service efficiency

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $8,000 ($8.0K)

Contractor: United Parcel Service CO.

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2025-10-01

End Date: 2026-01-31

Contract Duration: 122 days

Daily Burn Rate: $66/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: SHIPMENT OF INMATE PERSONAL PROPERTY

Place of Performance

Location: LOUISVILLE, JEFFERSON County, KENTUCKY, 40223

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $8,000 to UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO. for work described as: SHIPMENT OF INMATE PERSONAL PROPERTY Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the specialized nature of inmate property logistics. 2. Competition was limited, suggesting potential for price negotiation improvements. 3. Risk indicators are low due to the established nature of the service and contractor. 4. Performance context shows a reliance on established delivery networks for correctional facilities. 5. Sector positioning is within the essential logistics and courier services supporting government operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $8 million over approximately one year for inmate personal property shipment is within a reasonable range for specialized logistics services. Benchmarking against similar government contracts for mail and package delivery suggests competitive pricing, especially considering the security and tracking requirements inherent in correctional facility operations. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while competition was sought, certain sources were excluded, potentially limiting the bidder pool. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed but could relate to specialized capabilities or prior performance. A limited competition may result in less aggressive pricing compared to full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition may mean taxpayers did not benefit from the most aggressive pricing achievable through a wider bidding process.

Public Impact

Inmates benefit from the reliable shipment of their personal belongings to and from correctional facilities. The Bureau of Prisons ensures continuity of personal items for inmates during transfers or upon release. Geographic impact is nationwide, covering all Federal Bureau of Prisons facilities. Workforce implications are minimal, primarily impacting logistics and administrative staff within the Bureau of Prisons and UPS.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition could lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Lack of transparency regarding source exclusion criteria warrants further investigation.

Positive Signals

Award to a well-established carrier like UPS suggests reliability and established infrastructure.
Firm-fixed-price contract provides budget predictability.
The service addresses a critical need for inmate welfare and facility management.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader courier and express delivery services sector, a mature market dominated by large players like UPS, FedEx, and USPS. Government contracts in this space often focus on reliability, security, and cost-effectiveness for specific needs, such as inmate property management. The total addressable market for government logistics services is substantial, with agencies frequently outsourcing these functions.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'ss' being false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to a large, established carrier like UPS suggests that small businesses are unlikely to be significantly impacted directly by this specific contract, either positively or negatively, unless they are part of UPS's broader supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight is likely managed by the Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, with performance expectations tied to delivery and handling standards. Transparency is moderate, with the contract award details available, but the rationale for excluding certain sources is not fully detailed.

Related Government Programs

Federal Inmate Mail and Package Services
Government Logistics and Transportation Contracts
Bureau of Prisons Operational Support

Risk Flags

Limited competition may result in higher costs.
Lack of detailed justification for source exclusion.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $8,000 to UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO.. SHIPMENT OF INMATE PERSONAL PROPERTY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $8,000.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-10-01. End: 2026-01-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for inmate personal property shipment by the Federal Prison System?

Historical spending data for inmate personal property shipment by the Federal Prison System (FPS) indicates a consistent need for these services. While specific figures for this exact service category may fluctuate year-to-year based on inmate population movements and policy changes, the FPS has historically allocated significant resources to ensure the secure and timely transport of inmate belongings. Contracts for such services are often re-competed periodically, with pricing influenced by market conditions and the specific requirements of each solicitation. Analyzing past contract awards, including their values, durations, and awarded contractors, would provide a clearer picture of spending trends and potential cost efficiencies achieved over time. This contract's $8 million value for a 12-month period suggests a substantial, ongoing requirement that aligns with typical FPS operational needs.

How does the pricing of this UPS contract compare to other federal agencies using similar courier services?

Comparing the pricing of this $8 million contract for inmate personal property shipment with other federal agencies' courier service contracts requires detailed analysis of scope, volume, service levels, and geographic coverage. Generally, large federal agencies like the Department of Defense or the General Services Administration (GSA) negotiate significant volume discounts with major carriers like UPS. However, the specialized nature of inmate property (security, tracking, specific handling protocols) may command a premium compared to standard package delivery. If this contract's per-shipment cost or overall value is significantly higher than comparable contracts for less specialized government logistics, it could indicate a pricing issue. Conversely, if it aligns with or is lower than contracts with similar security requirements, it suggests reasonable value.

What are the specific risks associated with relying on a single carrier like UPS for this service?

Relying on a single carrier like UPS for inmate personal property shipment introduces several risks. The primary risk is service disruption; any operational issues faced by UPS (e.g., labor strikes, natural disasters affecting hubs, network outages) could directly impact the Bureau of Prisons' ability to transfer inmate property, potentially causing delays, inmate dissatisfaction, and operational complications. Another risk is reduced bargaining power in future contract negotiations; a demonstrated reliance on one provider can weaken the government's position to negotiate lower prices or better terms in subsequent procurements. Furthermore, if UPS's performance degrades, the government has limited immediate alternatives without initiating a new, potentially lengthy, procurement process. The 'limited competition' aspect of this award exacerbates these risks by suggesting that alternative providers may not be readily available or qualified.

What performance metrics are likely being used to evaluate UPS's service delivery under this contract?

Performance metrics for this contract likely focus on key aspects of logistics and correctional facility requirements. These would typically include on-time delivery rates, ensuring property arrives at its destination within the agreed-upon timeframe. Accuracy in tracking and documentation is crucial, verifying that the correct property is delivered to the correct inmate or facility. Damage rates for shipped items would also be a critical metric, measuring the quality of handling and packaging. Furthermore, compliance with all security protocols and chain-of-custody requirements is paramount, ensuring that inmate property is handled securely throughout the transit process. Response times to inquiries or issues from Bureau of Prisons staff would also likely be monitored to ensure effective communication and problem resolution.

How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause impact the potential for cost savings?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause indicates that while the solicitation was intended for broad participation, specific potential bidders were intentionally excluded. The impact on cost savings is generally negative compared to true 'Full and Open Competition.' When fewer bidders participate, the competitive pressure to offer the lowest price is reduced. The government may not receive the most advantageous pricing if the excluded sources could have offered a more competitive bid. The justification for excluding sources is critical; if based on highly specialized capabilities or security clearances that only a few possess, the limited competition might be unavoidable. However, if exclusions were arbitrary or based on minor criteria, it could represent a missed opportunity for significant taxpayer savings.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Couriers and Express Delivery Services › Couriers and Express Delivery Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1400 N HURSTBOURNE PKWY, LOUISVILLE, KY, 40223

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $8,000

Exercised Options: $8,000

Current Obligation: $8,000

Actual Outlays: $3,585

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HTC71123DC025

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline