EPA's $22.1M cellular services contract awarded via full and open competition shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,126,695 ($22.1M)

Contractor: Cellco Partnership

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2016-10-01

End Date: 2023-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,555 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: CELLULAR WIRELESS SERVICES FOR MOBILE DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT.

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20004

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $22.1 million to CELLCO PARTNERSHIP for work described as: CELLULAR WIRELESS SERVICES FOR MOBILE DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT. Key points: 1. Contract provides essential mobile communication services for EPA operations. 2. Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 3. Duration of 2555 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. The contract's value is moderate within the context of federal IT services. 5. Performance period spans multiple fiscal years, requiring consistent service delivery. 6. Services are concentrated in the District of Columbia, supporting regional operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $22.1 million over its 7-year term suggests a reasonable annual spend of around $3.16 million for cellular wireless services. Benchmarking against similar federal contracts for mobile device and equipment services indicates that this pricing is within the expected range, especially considering the full and open competition. The use of Time and Materials (T&M) pricing, while requiring careful oversight, can be cost-effective for services with variable usage patterns. Without specific per-unit data, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the competitive award process provides a degree of assurance.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 3 bidders indicates a moderate level of competition for this requirement. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, a competitive process was still employed, which is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers. The agency's decision to use full and open competition suggests confidence in the market's ability to meet their needs.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and a wider array of innovative solutions. This approach helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by preventing sole-source awards that might otherwise incur higher costs.

Public Impact

EPA employees across the District of Columbia benefit from reliable mobile communication services, enabling efficient operations and data access. The contract ensures the delivery of essential cellular wireless services, supporting daily administrative and operational tasks. Geographic impact is primarily focused on the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, where EPA headquarters and regional offices are located. Workforce implications include ensuring EPA staff have the necessary tools for communication and connectivity, supporting productivity and responsiveness.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns with Time and Materials (T&M) pricing if not closely monitored.
Dependence on a single contract vehicle for critical communication services.
Ensuring consistent service quality and coverage across all mobile devices and equipment.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive marketplace.
Contract duration suggests a stable and predictable service provision.
Services are essential for EPA's operational continuity and employee productivity.

Sector Analysis

The federal spending on telecommunications and IT services is substantial, with cellular wireless services forming a critical component. This contract falls within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on mobile communication solutions. The market for these services is dominated by large telecommunications providers, and federal agencies often leverage large-scale contracts to procure these necessities. Benchmarking against similar federal spending reveals that the $22.1 million over seven years is a moderate investment for an agency like the EPA, reflecting standard market rates for comprehensive mobile services.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside (ss=false) and there is no indication of specific small business subcontracting goals (sb=false). Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal. The award was made to Cellco Partnership, a major telecommunications provider, suggesting that the primary focus was on securing established services rather than promoting small business participation through this specific vehicle. Future contracts or task orders under this BPA might include subcontracting opportunities, but this is not evident from the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Environmental Protection Agency's contracting officers and program managers. Given the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, robust oversight is crucial to monitor labor hours, material costs, and ensure that services are delivered efficiently and within budget. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction for this particular contract isn't detailed, the EPA's Office of Inspector General typically oversees agency spending to ensure accountability and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Telecommunications Services
IT Equipment and Software
Mobile Device Management
Wireless Communication Services
Agency-Specific IT Support

Risk Flags

Potential for cost creep due to Time and Materials pricing structure.
Need for diligent oversight to ensure efficient service delivery.
Reliance on a single vendor for critical communication infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $22.1 million to CELLCO PARTNERSHIP. CELLULAR WIRELESS SERVICES FOR MOBILE DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CELLCO PARTNERSHIP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-10-01. End: 2023-09-30.

What is the historical spending trend for cellular wireless services at the EPA?

Analyzing historical spending trends for cellular wireless services at the EPA requires access to detailed budget and contract data over multiple fiscal years. While this specific contract (awarded in 2016) represents a significant portion of spending during its active period, the EPA likely procures similar services through various vehicles and task orders. Without access to a comprehensive database of all EPA telecommunications expenditures, it's difficult to establish a precise historical trend. However, federal agencies generally show a consistent or increasing demand for mobile communication services due to evolving technology and the need for remote work capabilities. The $22.1 million over seven years suggests an average annual spend of approximately $3.16 million, which can be compared to previous and subsequent spending patterns to identify growth or reduction in this category.

How does the per-unit cost of services under this contract compare to market rates for similar federal agencies?

Determining the precise per-unit cost for services under this contract is challenging without specific data points such as cost per line, data usage tiers, or device costs. The contract utilizes a Time and Materials (T&M) pricing model, which means costs are based on actual labor hours and material expenses incurred, rather than fixed unit prices. However, the overall contract value of $22.1 million over approximately seven years suggests an average annual expenditure of around $3.16 million. To benchmark this against market rates for similar federal agencies, one would need to compare this annual spend against the size and mobile communication needs of comparable agencies (e.g., other mid-to-large sized environmental or regulatory bodies). The fact that it was awarded under full and open competition with three bidders implies that the pricing was deemed competitive within the market at the time of award.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the contractor's performance?

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for a cellular wireless services contract typically focus on service availability, network performance, customer support responsiveness, and billing accuracy. For this EPA contract, specific KPIs would likely include metrics such as network uptime percentage, data transmission speeds, call completion rates, and the time taken to resolve reported service issues. Customer satisfaction surveys among EPA users would also serve as a crucial KPI. Billing accuracy is paramount, especially with a Time and Materials (T&M) structure, requiring regular audits to ensure charges align with services rendered and agreed-upon rates. While not explicitly detailed in the provided data, these are standard KPIs for such federal procurements, and their successful achievement would be critical for continued performance and potential future contract renewals.

What is the track record of Cellco Partnership (Verizon) in fulfilling federal contracts of similar scope and value?

Cellco Partnership, operating as Verizon, has a substantial track record in fulfilling federal contracts for telecommunications and wireless services. As one of the largest telecommunications providers in the United States, Verizon frequently secures large-scale government contracts across various agencies. Their experience typically includes providing mobile device management, network connectivity, and data services. Federal contract databases often show numerous awards to Verizon for similar services, ranging in value and duration. Agencies generally rely on Verizon due to its extensive network infrastructure and established service offerings. When evaluating a contractor like Verizon, agencies typically look at past performance reviews, on-time delivery rates, and adherence to contract terms and conditions from previous engagements to assess their reliability and capability.

What are the potential risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this service?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract type, such as the one used for this EPA cellular services procurement, is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M agreements compensate the contractor for the actual labor hours expended and the cost of materials used. If not managed diligently, this can lead to costs exceeding initial estimates, as the contractor has less financial incentive to control labor hours or material expenses. For the EPA, this necessitates robust oversight, including detailed tracking of all hours worked, verification of material costs, and regular audits of invoices. Without strong management controls and clear definition of 'materials,' there's a risk of inefficiency or inflated charges, potentially impacting the overall value for taxpayer money.

How does the geographic concentration in Washington D.C. affect the overall value and management of this contract?

The geographic concentration of services primarily in Washington D.C. simplifies some aspects of contract management and performance monitoring for the EPA. It allows for more focused oversight of service delivery and potentially easier coordination with end-users and support staff located within a defined area. This concentration can also lead to more predictable service demands and potentially better network performance within that specific region, assuming adequate infrastructure. However, it also means that the contract's value is heavily tied to the operational needs of the EPA's headquarters and regional offices in D.C. If the EPA has significant mobile communication needs outside this area that are not covered by this contract, it might necessitate separate procurement vehicles, potentially leading to less consolidated spending and management efficiencies. The value is realized through reliable connectivity for a concentrated user base.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Other Computer Related Services

Product/Service Code: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT (INCLD FIRMWARE) SOFTWARE,SUPPLIES& SUPPORT EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Verizon Maryland LLC

Address: ONE VERIZON WY, BASKING RIDGE, NJ, 07920

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,926,041

Exercised Options: $24,926,041

Current Obligation: $22,126,695

Actual Outlays: $7,377,898

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q13NSA3003

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline