GSA's $12.2M IT hardware contract with Dell, awarded in 2001, highlights long-term IT procurement trends
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $12,232,622 ($12.2M)
Contractor: Dell Marketing L.P.
Awarding Agency: General Services Administration
Start Date: 2001-06-15
End Date: 2006-01-25
Contract Duration: 1,685 days
Daily Burn Rate: $7.3K/day
Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER
Number of Offers Received: 51
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: IT
Place of Performance
Location: ROUND ROCK, WILLIAMSON County, TEXAS, 78682
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
General Services Administration obligated $12.2 million to DELL MARKETING L.P. for work described as: Key points: 1. This contract represents a significant investment in IT hardware for federal agencies. 2. The fixed-price nature of the contract provided cost certainty for the government. 3. Competition dynamics for IT hardware procurement can influence pricing and vendor selection. 4. The duration of the contract suggests a sustained need for these IT resources. 5. Performance context is crucial to understand the value delivered over the contract's lifespan. 6. Sector positioning within IT hardware manufacturing is a key consideration for this award.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this 2001 contract is challenging due to the rapid evolution of IT hardware and pricing. However, the total award of over $12 million indicates a substantial procurement. Without specific performance metrics or comparisons to contemporary market rates for similar configurations, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to control costs, but the ultimate value depends on the technology's utility and lifespan.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that it was part of a broader competitive process, likely a multiple-award contract or a pre-competed vehicle. The presence of 51 offers suggests robust competition, which typically drives down prices and encourages innovation. This level of competition is generally favorable for the government, ensuring a wider selection of vendors and potentially better terms.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process for IT hardware helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by leveraging market forces to secure favorable pricing and quality.
Public Impact
Federal agencies requiring electronic computer hardware benefited from this contract. The services delivered included the provision of IT hardware, supporting agency operations. The geographic impact was likely nationwide, as federal agencies operate across the US. Workforce implications could include IT support staff managing and deploying the hardware.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for technology obsolescence given the contract's start date.
- Ensuring adequate support and maintenance for hardware procured over a decade ago.
- Assessing if the procured hardware met evolving cybersecurity standards throughout its lifecycle.
Positive Signals
- The competitive nature of the award suggests a focus on obtaining good value.
- The firm fixed-price contract provided budget predictability for the procuring agency.
- The substantial number of offers indicates a healthy market for federal IT hardware.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Information Technology sector, specifically the manufacturing and sale of electronic computers. The IT hardware market is characterized by rapid technological advancements, intense competition, and significant government spending. Federal agencies are major consumers of IT hardware, relying on it for critical operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale IT hardware procurements by federal agencies during the early 2000s.
Small Business Impact
Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans for this specific delivery order was not provided. However, large IT hardware contracts often involve prime contractors who may or may not be small businesses. If Dell Marketing L.P. was the prime, their status as a large business would mean that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses would be crucial for meeting federal small business goals.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), likely through its Federal Acquisition Service. Accountability measures would include contract performance reviews, adherence to delivery schedules, and warranty provisions. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance data from that era may be less accessible.
Related Government Programs
- IT Hardware Procurement
- General Services Administration Contracts
- Federal IT Spending
- Electronic Computer Manufacturing Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for technology obsolescence
- Long contract duration in a fast-evolving sector
- Limited performance data available for historical contracts
Tags
it, gsa, dell, competitive-delivery-order, firm-fixed-price, hardware, computers, texas, large-contract, 2001-award
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
General Services Administration awarded $12.2 million to DELL MARKETING L.P.. See the official description on USAspending.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is DELL MARKETING L.P..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $12.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2001-06-15. End: 2006-01-25.
What was the specific type of electronic computer hardware procured under this contract?
The data indicates the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 334111, which corresponds to 'Electronic Computer Manufacturing.' This suggests the contract was for the procurement of computers, such as desktops, laptops, or servers, and potentially related components manufactured by Dell. Without more granular details within the contract award itself, the precise configuration and models of the hardware are not specified in the provided data. However, given the manufacturer and NAICS code, it is reasonable to infer that the procurement focused on standard computing devices essential for federal agency operations.
How did the pricing of this contract compare to market rates at the time of award?
Assessing the precise pricing comparison to market rates for this 2001 contract is challenging without access to contemporary market analysis or detailed bid data. However, the contract was awarded under a 'full-and-open' competitive process with 51 offers, which generally indicates that the government received competitive pricing. Dell Marketing L.P. was a major IT vendor, and GSA's role often involves leveraging bulk purchasing power. The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type also suggests that the price was agreed upon upfront, aiming to mitigate risk for the government. To conduct a thorough comparison, one would need to analyze average selling prices for similar Dell computer systems during that period, factoring in volume discounts and specific configurations.
What were the primary risks associated with this IT hardware contract?
Several risks were associated with this IT hardware contract, particularly given its duration (1685 days) and the rapid pace of technological change in the IT sector. Key risks included technology obsolescence, where the hardware procured could become outdated before the end of its useful life, impacting performance and security. Another significant risk was vendor lock-in or reliance on a single supplier for support and maintenance, although the competitive award process aimed to mitigate this. Performance risks could arise if the hardware did not meet agency needs or experienced frequent failures. Cybersecurity risks were also paramount, as older hardware might be more vulnerable to emerging threats. Finally, budget risks could emerge if maintenance or upgrade costs exceeded initial projections.
What was the historical spending pattern for similar IT hardware procurements by the GSA around 2001?
Historical spending patterns for IT hardware by the GSA around 2001 indicate a significant and growing federal investment in technology. Agencies were increasingly digitizing operations, leading to substantial demand for computers, servers, and networking equipment. GSA, through vehicles like the one this delivery order was likely placed against, played a crucial role in consolidating purchasing power. Spending in this category was often characterized by large-volume, multi-year contracts to achieve economies of scale. The early 2000s saw a transition towards more standardized hardware configurations and increased competition among major vendors like Dell, HP, and IBM. Analyzing GSA's overall IT spending reports from that era would reveal trends in dollar volume, types of hardware procured, and the dominant contracting vehicles used.
How effective was this contract in meeting the long-term IT needs of the agencies it served?
The effectiveness of this contract in meeting long-term IT needs is difficult to ascertain solely from the award data. The contract's duration of approximately 4.6 years suggests it was intended to provide a stable supply of hardware. However, the rapid evolution of IT means that hardware procured in 2001 might have been considered end-of-life or significantly underperforming by the mid-2000s. Effectiveness would depend on whether the procured hardware was adequately supported, whether refresh cycles were managed effectively by agencies, and if the initial specifications truly aligned with evolving operational requirements. Without post-award performance reviews or data on hardware utilization and replacement, a definitive judgment on long-term effectiveness cannot be made.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing › Electronic Computer Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT (INCLD FIRMWARE) SOFTWARE,SUPPLIES& SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER
Offers Received: 51
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Dell Computer Corporation (UEI: 114315195)
Address: ONE DELL WAY, ROUND ROCK, TX, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: GS35F4076D
IDV Type: FSS
Timeline
Start Date: 2001-06-15
Current End Date: 2006-01-25
Potential End Date: 2006-01-25 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2014-05-22
More Contracts from Dell Marketing L.P.
- Microsoft ESA Agreement — $1.3B (Department of Defense)
- Microsoft Products — $508.0M (Department of Defense)
- Microsoft M365 E5 — $477.2M (Department of Defense)
- 200410!000781!5700!GV90 !ssg/Pk !gs35f4076d !C!N! !n!fa877104f8320! !20040630!20040709!114315195!114315195!114315195!n!dell Marketing L P !ONE Dell WAY !round Rock !tx!78682!63500!491!48!round Rock !williamson !texas !+000012313462!n!n!000000000000!7030!adp Software !A7 !electronics and Communication Equip !000 !* !511210!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B!A!Y! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !C!N! ! ! ! ! ! ! !00 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $471.3M (Department of Defense)
- Microsoft Enterprise Products — $354.9M (Department of Defense)
Other General Services Administration Contracts
- Software Life Cycle Development — $1.4B (Science Applications International Corporation)
- Task Order (TO) 47qfca21f0018 IS Hereby Awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc. (BAH) to Provide Enterprise Level Data to the Ousd(c), and ITS Strategic Partners (I.E., DOD Fourth Estate, DOD Departments, and IC Community) — $1.4B (Booz Allen Hamilton Inc)
- Federal Contract — $1.2B (Booz Allen Hamilton Inc)
- THE Scope of the to IS to Provide Enterprise IT Services for the Usace — $1.1B (Science Applications International Corporation)
- Task Order Award — $1.1B (Booz Allen Hamilton Inc)