DOJ awards $20.4M for office furniture, raising questions on competition and value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,441 ($20.4K)

Contractor: Krueger International, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2026-04-07

End Date: 2026-04-28

Contract Duration: 21 days

Daily Burn Rate: $973/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT

Sector: Other

Official Description: NIGHTINGALE OPEN MARKET

Place of Performance

Location: GREEN BAY, BROWN County, WISCONSIN, 54302

State: Wisconsin Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $20,440.98 to KRUEGER INTERNATIONAL, INC. for work described as: NIGHTINGALE OPEN MARKET Key points: 1. Contract awarded via purchase order, indicating a non-competitive process. 2. Limited competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and lack of market-driven pricing. 3. The fixed-price contract with economic price adjustment introduces risk of cost escalation. 4. The duration of 21 days for a $20.4M award is unusually short, potentially impacting thoroughness. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 337214 suggests a focus on office furniture manufacturing. 6. The contract is not a small business set-aside, with no indication of subcontracting plans.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $20.4 million for office furniture, awarded through a purchase order, warrants scrutiny. Without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to benchmark the pricing against market rates or similar government contracts. The fixed-price nature with economic price adjustment also introduces uncertainty regarding the final cost. The short performance period for such a substantial award may also suggest rushed procurement or an incomplete assessment of needs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed under the simplified acquisition procedures (SAP) and was awarded as a purchase order. The data indicates it was 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP', suggesting a sole-source or limited competition procurement. The lack of open competition means there were likely no formal bids solicited, and the price was determined without direct comparison to multiple vendor offerings. This limits the government's ability to secure the best possible price.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not be receiving the best value for their money due to the absence of competitive pressure to drive down costs. The government may have paid a premium for the furniture without exploring potentially lower-cost alternatives.

Public Impact

Federal Prison Industries (Unicor) is the apparent subcontractor, suggesting an internal government manufacturing source. The Department of Justice is the primary beneficiary, likely for furnishing federal facilities. The geographic impact is tied to Wisconsin, where the contract is registered. Workforce implications are unclear but may involve manufacturing jobs within the federal prison system.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated prices.
Economic price adjustment clause introduces cost escalation risk.
Short performance period raises concerns about thoroughness and potential rushed delivery.
Award mechanism (purchase order) bypasses standard competitive procurement processes.
No indication of small business participation or subcontracting.

Positive Signals

Award to Federal Prison Industries (Unicor) may support inmate rehabilitation programs.
Ensures supply of essential office furniture for DOJ operations.
Fixed price component provides some cost certainty before adjustments.

Sector Analysis

The office furniture manufacturing sector (NAICS 337214) is a mature industry with established players. Government procurement of office furniture is common, often subject to specific regulations and set-aside programs. This contract, valued at over $20 million, represents a significant award within this sector. Benchmarking against similar large-scale government furniture contracts would be necessary to fully assess value, but the non-competitive nature here is a key differentiator.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to be a small business set-aside, as indicated by 'sb: false'. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans. The award to Federal Prison Industries (Unicor) suggests an internal government source rather than a typical small business engagement. This means the contract is unlikely to directly benefit the small business ecosystem through set-asides or mandated subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Justice's internal procurement and financial oversight mechanisms. As a purchase order, it may have less formal oversight than a competitively bid contract. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature. There is no specific mention of Inspector General jurisdiction for this particular award, though the DOJ IG generally oversees departmental spending.

Related Government Programs

Federal Prison Industries (Unicor) Contracts
Department of Justice Office Furniture Procurement
Government Purchase Orders
Office Furniture Manufacturing Contracts

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Overpricing
Cost Escalation Risk (EPA)
Unusually Short Performance Period
Non-Competitive Award Mechanism

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $20,440.98 to KRUEGER INTERNATIONAL, INC.. NIGHTINGALE OPEN MARKET

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KRUEGER INTERNATIONAL, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison Industries / Unicor).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20,440.98.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-07. End: 2026-04-28.

What is the typical pricing for similar office furniture contracts awarded by the federal government?

Determining typical pricing for similar federal office furniture contracts is challenging without direct comparison data. However, contracts awarded through full and open competition generally yield lower prices due to market forces. The absence of competition for this $20.4 million DOJ contract suggests that the price may not be optimized. Factors like material costs, manufacturing efficiency, and delivery logistics influence pricing. A detailed analysis would require comparing unit costs for specific furniture items (e.g., desks, chairs) against publicly available contract awards for comparable quantities and quality standards, ideally from competitive solicitations.

What are the risks associated with a fixed-price contract with economic price adjustment (EPA)?

A fixed-price contract with economic price adjustment (EPA) aims to protect both the contractor and the government from unforeseen fluctuations in costs, typically related to labor or material prices. For the government, the primary risk is cost escalation. While the base price is fixed, the EPA clause allows for increases if specific economic indicators rise, potentially leading to a final cost higher than initially anticipated. This can reduce budget predictability. For the contractor, the risk is mitigated as they are compensated for documented cost increases. The effectiveness of the EPA depends on the specific index used and the clarity of the adjustment formula to prevent disputes.

Why might a contract be awarded as a purchase order and not competed?

Contracts are awarded as purchase orders without competition for several reasons, often related to the nature of the goods or services, urgency, or specific procurement regulations. For smaller dollar amounts, simplified acquisition procedures allow for less formal competition. However, for larger sums like $20.4 million, a non-competed purchase order suggests either a sole-source justification (e.g., unique capability, proprietary product), an urgent need where competition is impractical, or a specific statutory authority allowing non-competitive award. In this case, the data 'NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP' implies it bypassed standard competitive processes, potentially due to specific circumstances or internal government sourcing like Federal Prison Industries.

What is the significance of NAICS code 337214 in the context of this contract?

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 337214 specifically identifies establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing office furniture, except wood. This includes items like metal and plastic office furniture, chairs, and related components. In the context of this $20.4 million Department of Justice contract, it signifies that the procured goods are office furniture manufactured by the contractor. This code helps categorize the contract within the broader industrial landscape and allows for comparison with other government spending in the office furniture manufacturing sector. It also indicates the type of industry expertise and production capabilities expected from the awardee.

What is the role of Federal Prison Industries (Unicor) in this contract?

Federal Prison Industries (FPI), also known as Unicor, is a government corporation that provides products and services manufactured by inmates in federal prisons. The data indicates 'Federal Prison Industries / Unicor' as the source agency ('sa'). This suggests that Unicor is either the direct manufacturer or the entity through which this office furniture is being procured for the Department of Justice. Awards to Unicor often bypass traditional competitive bidding processes, as they are mandated to be a source for certain government needs. This arrangement supports inmate labor programs while supplying goods to federal agencies.

How does the short duration (21 days) impact the assessment of this contract?

A contract duration of only 21 days for a $20.4 million award is exceptionally short and raises several concerns. It suggests a highly urgent requirement or a very rapid procurement cycle. This brevity could limit the time available for thorough needs assessment, detailed specification development, quality assurance planning, and potentially even the manufacturing or delivery timeline itself. For the contractor, it implies a need for immediate resource allocation and rapid fulfillment. From an oversight perspective, such a short window might indicate a rushed process, potentially increasing the risk of errors, overlooked requirements, or suboptimal pricing due to time constraints.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Office Furniture (including Fixtures) Manufacturing › Office Furniture (except Wood) Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: FURNITURE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT (K)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1330 BELLEVUE ST, GREEN BAY, WI, 54302

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: $20,441

Exercised Options: $20,441

Current Obligation: $20,441

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline