VA awards $127,820 contract for HP Poly headsets, highlighting electronic manufacturing sector spending

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $127,820 ($127.8K)

Contractor: Better Direct, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Start Date: 2026-04-10

End Date: 2027-04-09

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $351/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: HP POLY BW 8225-M USB-C HS TAA

Place of Performance

Location: TEMPE, MARICOPA County, ARIZONA, 85288

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Veterans Affairs obligated $127,820 to BETTER DIRECT, LLC for work described as: HP POLY BW 8225-M USB-C HS TAA Key points: 1. Contract awarded to BETTER DIRECT, LLC for electronic computer manufacturing supplies. 2. The contract duration is 364 days, indicating a short-term need for these specific items. 3. The award was made under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 4. This spending falls under the broader category of electronic computer manufacturing. 5. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which provides cost certainty for the government. 6. The geographic location of the contractor is Arizona.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $127,820 for 364 days of supply for HP Poly headsets appears reasonable given the unit count and type of equipment. Without specific unit pricing or a detailed bill of materials, a direct per-unit cost comparison is difficult. However, the total award amount is within the expected range for bulk procurement of such electronic equipment for government use. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract helps manage cost risks for the VA.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but the designation suggests a robust competitive environment. This approach is generally favored as it allows for the widest possible pool of offerors, potentially leading to better pricing and innovation.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces and ensuring the government receives the best value for its expenditure.

Public Impact

Veterans Affairs (VA) personnel will benefit from the use of these communication headsets, potentially improving their ability to perform duties. The services delivered include the provision of electronic equipment essential for modern office and communication needs. The geographic impact is primarily within the VA facilities where these headsets will be deployed, likely across Arizona given the contractor's location. Workforce implications include ensuring VA staff have the necessary tools for effective communication and task completion.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific unit pricing makes detailed value-for-money assessment challenging.
Limited information on the number of bidders in the full and open competition.
The contract is for a single delivery order, suggesting a potentially fragmented procurement strategy if similar needs arise frequently.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible process.
Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost predictability for the VA.
The contractor, BETTER DIRECT, LLC, is located within the US (Arizona).

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Electronic Computer Manufacturing sector, specifically for peripherals like headsets. This sector is characterized by rapid technological advancements and global supply chains. Spending in this area by government agencies like the VA is common for equipping personnel with necessary communication tools. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other government contracts for similar electronic communication devices, considering factors like quantity, brand, and specific features.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary contractor is likely not a small business. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or requirements, so the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific award is unclear, though larger prime contractors often utilize small business subcontractors on broader agreements.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Veterans Affairs contracting officers and program managers responsible for ensuring delivery and performance. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specified goods. Transparency is facilitated by the public availability of contract data, allowing for general oversight. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

IT Equipment Procurement
Communication Devices
Department of Veterans Affairs IT Spending
Electronic Manufacturing Services

Risk Flags

TAA Compliance Verification
Product Quality and Durability
Delivery Schedule Adherence
Compatibility with VA Systems

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Veterans Affairs awarded $127,820 to BETTER DIRECT, LLC. HP POLY BW 8225-M USB-C HS TAA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BETTER DIRECT, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (Department of Veterans Affairs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $127,820.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-10. End: 2027-04-09.

What is the specific model and feature set of the HP Poly BW 8225-M USB-C HS TAA headsets being procured?

The specific model is the HP Poly BW 8225-M USB-C Headset, designed for TAA compliance. This typically means it meets Trade Agreements Act requirements, often necessary for government procurement. The 'HS' likely denotes 'Headset,' and 'USB-C' indicates the connection type. These headsets are generally designed for professional use, offering features like noise-canceling microphones, comfortable earcups for extended wear, and integration with communication platforms. The exact feature set, such as specific audio quality standards or compatibility with particular VA communication software, would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or specifications, which are not provided in the summary data.

How does the unit price compare to market rates for similar professional headsets?

Without the exact quantity of headsets purchased under the $127,820 award, calculating a precise unit price is not possible. However, if we assume a quantity that would make sense for a single delivery order of this value (e.g., 500-1000 units), the implied unit cost would range from approximately $127 to $255 per headset. Professional-grade headsets like the Poly BW 8225-M, especially TAA-compliant versions, can retail in this range or higher depending on the vendor and bulk discounts. Market research on similar enterprise-level headsets from brands like Jabra, Logitech, or Plantronics (now Poly) suggests that prices for TAA-compliant models with advanced features often fall between $100 and $300. Therefore, the potential unit price appears to be within a competitive market range, assuming a reasonable quantity was procured.

What is the track record of BETTER DIRECT, LLC in fulfilling government contracts, particularly for electronic equipment?

Information regarding the specific track record of BETTER DIRECT, LLC in fulfilling government contracts is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance history, including on-time delivery rates, quality of goods provided, and any past performance issues or awards. Government contract databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) often contain performance evaluations and contract histories for vendors. Without access to this detailed history, it's difficult to definitively assess their reliability and experience in supplying electronic equipment to federal agencies. However, being awarded a contract, especially under full and open competition, suggests they met the basic qualifications and requirements set forth by the VA for this procurement.

What is the historical spending pattern of the Department of Veterans Affairs on similar communication headsets?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on communication headsets. To analyze this, one would need to query federal procurement databases for past contracts awarded by the VA for similar items (e.g., headsets, communication devices, electronic peripherals) over several fiscal years. This analysis would reveal trends in spending volume, average contract values, preferred vendors, and the types of headsets procured. Understanding historical spending can help benchmark the current $127,820 award against previous investments, identify potential cost savings opportunities, or highlight shifts in technology or procurement strategies within the VA for such equipment.

Are there any specific performance risks associated with this type of electronic equipment procurement?

Performance risks in procuring electronic equipment like headsets include potential issues with product quality, durability, compatibility with existing IT infrastructure, and timely delivery. For the HP Poly BW 8225-M, risks could involve defects, premature failure, or performance degradation over time, impacting user productivity. Compatibility issues might arise if the headsets do not seamlessly integrate with the VA's specific communication software or hardware. Delivery delays could disrupt operations. The TAA compliance requirement adds a layer of risk if the sourced products do not strictly meet these regulations. The firm fixed-price nature mitigates financial risk for the government but places the performance risk more squarely on the contractor.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing › Electronic Computer Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: ELECTRICAL/ELECTRONIC EQPT COMPNTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2425 E UNIVERSITY DR, TEMPE, AZ, 85288

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, HUBZone Firm, Limited Liability Corporation, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $127,820

Exercised Options: $127,820

Current Obligation: $127,820

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: NNG15SD45B

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline