GSA's $57.6M IT Contract with Sprint: Non-Competitive, Firm Fixed Price, 5-Year Duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $57,586,994 ($57.6M)

Contractor: Sprint Communications CO LP

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2003-08-05

End Date: 2008-10-28

Contract Duration: 1,911 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.1K/day

Competition Type: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IT RELATED PRODUCTS

Place of Performance

Location: FORT KNOX, HARDIN County, KENTUCKY, 40121

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $57.6 million to SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS CO LP for work described as: IT RELATED PRODUCTS Key points: 1. Significant IT spending of $57.6 million over five years. 2. Sole-source contract awarded to Sprint Communications Co LP. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type offers cost certainty but limits flexibility. 4. Potential for higher costs due to lack of competition.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value is substantial for IT products. However, the lack of competition raises concerns about whether the government secured the best possible price. Benchmarking against similar GSA schedules or competitive contracts would be necessary for a full assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This was a non-competitive delivery order, indicating a sole-source award. This method bypasses the competitive bidding process, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced innovation compared to an open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds may have been spent at a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure to lower costs.

Public Impact

Federal agencies relying on Sprint for IT products may face higher costs. Lack of competition limits opportunities for other IT vendors. Long-term reliance on a single vendor can create strategic risks. Transparency in pricing is reduced without a competitive process.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for overpayment

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract provides budget predictability

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under IT products, specifically within the General Services Administration's Federal Acquisition Service. Spending benchmarks for similar IT procurements vary widely, but non-competitive awards often represent a higher risk profile.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved in this specific contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. Sole-source awards can limit opportunities for small businesses to compete for federal contracts.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) is responsible for overseeing this contract. The non-competitive nature of the award warrants scrutiny to ensure fair pricing and adherence to procurement regulations.

Related Government Programs

Computer and Software Stores
General Services Administration Contracting
Federal Acquisition Service Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for inflated pricing
Limited vendor options
Reduced transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $57.6 million to SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS CO LP. IT RELATED PRODUCTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS CO LP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $57.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-08-05. End: 2008-10-28.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The justification for a sole-source award typically involves specific circumstances, such as the urgency of the need, the unavailability of the product or service from other sources, or a unique capability possessed by the awarded vendor. Without the specific justification document, it's impossible to definitively state why competition was bypassed for this $57.6 million IT contract.

How did the pricing compare to market rates for similar IT products at the time of award?

Assessing the pricing against market rates is challenging without access to the contract's detailed pricing structure and comparable market data from 2003. However, non-competitive awards inherently carry a higher risk of not achieving the best possible price compared to contracts awarded through full and open competition.

What was the overall effectiveness of this contract in meeting the government's IT needs?

The effectiveness of the contract in meeting the government's IT needs is not directly quantifiable from the provided data. While the contract was fulfilled over its duration, the lack of competition raises questions about whether alternative solutions or vendors could have provided better value, enhanced capabilities, or greater cost savings.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Retail Trade › Electronics and Appliance Stores › Computer and Software Stores

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Sprint Communications, Inc. (UEI: 006942395)

Address: 12524 SUNRISE VALLEY DR FL 2, RESTON, VA, 11

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $57,586,994

Exercised Options: $57,586,994

Current Obligation: $57,586,994

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS35F0329L

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline