GSA's $15.2M Electric Service Contract for KC, MO: Long-Term, Non-Competitive

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,279,122 ($15.3M)

Contractor: Evergy Metro, Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2007-08-04

End Date: 2018-02-03

Contract Duration: 3,836 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Energy

Official Description: PROVIDE ELECTRIC SERVICE TO 400 EAST 9TH STREET, KC,MO

Place of Performance

Location: KANSAS CITY, JACKSON County, MISSOURI, 64106

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $15.3 million to EVERGY METRO, INC. for work described as: PROVIDE ELECTRIC SERVICE TO 400 EAST 9TH STREET, KC,MO Key points: 1. High contract value over a decade suggests significant energy needs. 2. Lack of competition raises questions about price discovery and potential overpayment. 3. Long contract duration (2007-2018) may not reflect current market rates. 4. Sector context: Electric power generation is a stable but regulated industry.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $15.2M over nearly 11 years for electric service is substantial. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to assess if the pricing was optimal compared to market rates for similar services during that period.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not available for competition, indicating a limited source procurement. This method bypasses competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers as price discovery mechanisms are absent.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition likely resulted in higher costs for taxpayers compared to a fully competitive scenario.

Public Impact

Federal facilities in Kansas City, MO, received essential electric services. Taxpayers funded the electricity for a significant federal building. The long-term nature of the contract provided stable energy supply but potentially at a non-optimal price.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of Competition
Long Contract Duration
Potential for Overpricing

Positive Signals

Essential Service Provided
Stable Energy Supply

Sector Analysis

The electric power generation sector is typically characterized by regulated utilities providing essential services. Spending benchmarks vary widely based on location, demand, and contract type, but long-term, non-competitive contracts warrant scrutiny.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve small businesses as prime contractors. Analysis of subcontracting opportunities for small businesses is not available from the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) managed this contract. Oversight would typically involve monitoring service delivery and contract compliance, but the lack of competition limits oversight effectiveness regarding price.

Related Government Programs

Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation
General Services Administration Contracting
Public Buildings Service Programs

Risk Flags

Limited competition raises concerns about fair pricing.
Long contract duration may have led to above-market rates.
Lack of transparency in the procurement justification.
Potential for taxpayer overpayment due to non-competitive award.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $15.3 million to EVERGY METRO, INC.. PROVIDE ELECTRIC SERVICE TO 400 EAST 9TH STREET, KC,MO

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is EVERGY METRO, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-08-04. End: 2018-02-03.

What was the justification for the limited competition for this electric service contract?

The provided data states the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'. A formal justification would typically be required for such a determination, often citing unique circumstances, existing infrastructure dependencies, or sole provider status. Without this documentation, the rationale remains unclear, impacting the assessment of value.

How did the fixed price structure impact the government's financial risk over the contract's duration?

A firm fixed price contract generally shifts most of the cost risk to the contractor. However, if the initial price was set too high due to lack of competition, the government would be locked into paying that inflated price regardless of actual costs incurred by the utility.

Could the government have achieved better pricing through a more competitive procurement process?

It is highly probable that a competitive procurement process would have yielded better pricing. Competition incentivizes contractors to offer lower prices to win the contract. The absence of this mechanism for over a decade suggests a missed opportunity for cost savings.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Utilities › Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution › Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Great Plains Energy Inc (UEI: 064739076)

Address: 1201 WALNUT ST STE 2100, KANSAS CITY, MO, 64106

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,293,350

Exercised Options: $15,279,122

Current Obligation: $15,279,122

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00P07BSD0526

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline