About this file

This is a Justification and Approval (J&A) document for other than full and open competition submitted by the Indian Health Service (IHS) for a new acquisition in Fiscal Year 2026.

The acquisition is for computers and peripheral devices to support the Great Plains Area offices in Sisseton and Fort Thompson. The requirement is restricted to Dell brand equipment due to IHS standardization, cybersecurity, system management, and Electronic Health Record (EHR) performance needs. However, competition will occur among all authorized Dell resellers and partners. The procurement uses a Firm-Fixed Price approach and will be funded through Other Funds. The justification cites FAR 6.302-1 and FAR 11.105, establishing that Dell standardization is essential to meet mission-specific requirements with EHR-specific minimum specifications. Market research identified numerous authorized Dell resellers, including Native-owned small businesses and HUBZone-certified vendors, confirming broad vendor availability despite the brand-name restriction. The previous procurement (75H70624P00847) was an Indian Small Business Economic Enterprise (ISBEE) set-aside, and results from that action informed the current acquisition strategy. Price reasonableness will be established using competitive quotes from multiple Dell-authorized resellers, comparison to GSA pricing, and commercial list review. IHS conducts annual reviews of IT standardization policies to assess whether multi-manufacturer support is feasible without compromising cybersecurity or EHR interoperability. The document was prepared by LCDR Brenda Steiger, Supervisory IT Project Manager, and approved by contracting officer Nichole Lerew on April 15, 2026.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
IHS IEE Representation Form.pdf PDF
Combined Synopsis 26R00011 .pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Completion Instructions: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has established a standard template for the preparation of a J&A for Other Than Full and Open Competition. If this is an 8(a) set-aside, please note this form is not required unless the acquisition is valued (including all options) at greater than $22 million. This template is NOT applicable for actions using simplified acquisition procedures (FAR Part 13), Federal Supply Schedule orders (FAR 8.4) or task or delivery orders subject to fair opportunity (FAR 16.505).

Tailor all aspects of this template to the individual acquisition. Consult FAR Subpart 6.3 for guidance. An addendum may be added in case additional space is needed.

When this document is printed, the blue italic instructions are automatically deleted on the printed version.

Acquisition Title:

Agency:

Acquisition Year (FY):

Author and Title:

2. Description of Action:

Nature:

New Requirement

Follow-on Requirement

Modification to Existing Purchase Order/Contract Number:

Pricing: ✔Firm-Fixed Price

Cost Time & Materials

Other:

Funds: OMA

This is a brand-name restricted requirement for Dell e ✔ Other Funds:

Name of Proposed Contractor(s):

Street Address:

City, State, Zip:

3. Description of Services or Supplies:

Basis for Approval (FAR 6.303-1(d)): ✔Individual Basis Class Basis

The total estimated value of the proposed action, including all options is $

As applicable, briefly describe the services or supplies required to meet the agency's needs, including make & model number where appropriate. Include quantities of supplies or period of performance for services. Provide information for any options included. If the action is a modification to an existing contract, distinguish clearly between the work covered by the original contract and the work to be obtained by the proposed modification.

The Dell brand requirement is due to cybersecurity, system management, and EHR performance needs; however, competition will occur among all authorized Dell partners.

This is for computers and peripheral devices that meet or exceed the specifications required to work for our EHR and office enviroment.

There are published documents that state minimum specifications for working with our EHR.

IHS

LCDR Brenda Steiger, Supervisory IT Project Manager

Great Plains Area Computers for Area Office, Sisseton and Fort Thompson https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-13 https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-8#FAR_Subpart_8_4 https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-16#FAR_16_505 https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-6#FAR_Subpart_6_3 https://www.acquisition.gov/far/part-6#FAR_6_303_1

4. Authority and Rationale: Identify the statutory authority, FAR title and FAR citation permitting other than full and open competition. It may be one of the following most commonly used citations by the operating divisions of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), but other exceptions may apply per FAR Subpart 6.3.

Actions other than simplified acquisition procedures (select only one and provide an explanation):

FAR 6.302-1: Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, 41 U.S.C.

3304(a)(1)

Explain why the intended contractor is the only responsible source who can provide the required supplies or s ervices.

Discuss the unique capabilities, expertise, etc. that support the lack of competition/why no other type of supplies or servic es will satisfy agency requirements. Explain factors/unique qualifications such as proprietary data or exclusive licensing rights, if applicable. When competition is limited to items particular to one manufacturer, this justification must explain why the particular brand name, product, or feature is essential to the Government's requirements, and that market research indicate s other companies' similar products, or products lacking the particular feature, do not meet, or cannot be modified to meet the agency's needs in accordance with FAR 11.105. If in connection with a follow-on contract for continued development or production of highly specialized equipment, detail the substantial duplication of cost or unacceptable delays.

FAR 6.302-2: Unusual and compelling urgency, 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(2) If unusual and compelling urgency is the basis for the justification, explain the chronological events leading up to the requirement and explain why time constraints cannot permit even a limited competition. Describe the detrimental effects/ serious injury to the mission of the requiring activity or to the government, financial or otherwise, that will result if this justification is not approved. Describe impact of required delivery/performance date. Describe the detrimental effects/ seriou s injury to the mission of the requiring activity or to the government, financial or otherwise, that will result if this justification is not approved and the product or service cannot be provided by the intended sole source contractor. Failure to plan for expiring funds is not a valid reason for citing this exception. May not exceed one year, including all options, unless the head of the agency determines that exceptional circumstances apply.

FAR 6.302-5: Authorized or Required by Statute, 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(5) Provide a citation to the statutory authorization and a brief description of its content, or identify the specified source or other agency.

✔ Other (See FAR Subpart 6.3 for additional authority) Provide the authority and citation to the applicable section of FAR 6.3.

This justification is submitted under FAR 6.302-1 and FAR 11.105 for a brand-name restriction. Dell is essential due to IHS standardization and security requirements; however, the acquisition will be competed among authorized Dell resellers.

Provide a full explanation to justify use of the exception.

These computers are mission specific with EHR specific minimum requirements that support an on-going need for our agency. The agency has many automated tools that are standardized that require the manufacturer standardization for cyber-security and automation to be met.

5. Agency Actions to Take or Remove Barriers That Led to Other Than Full and Open Competition (If applicable):

Describe the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the restricted consideration prior to any subsequent acquisition for the supplies of services is made. If no such actions have been taken, explain why.

IHS conducts annual reviews of IT standardization policies to assess whether multi-manufacturer support is feasible without compromising cybersecurity or EHR interoperability."

There are hundreds of Dell Retailers available in the marketplace including Native owned small businesses and many Hub Zone businesses.

Needing Dell as a manufacturer does not limit the number of small businesses that can provide the products to the government. Sources

6. Bridge Contracts:

For contract extensions or bridge contracts when a competitive follow-on is in the process of being developed, summarize history of current contract and explain the reasons for any delays in the acquisition. Include discussion of the milestones f or the follow-on action; the milestones should be as efficient as possible. Discuss why it would be neither cost effective nor realistic to expect another contractor to perform during the brief interim period; include issues such as start -up costs, phase-in, transfer of GFP, recruitment and staffing, etc. If the action is because of a protest, provide a brief discussion of the protest including the date the protest was filed and the basis of the protest. Explain that the action will provide the minimum quant ity or performance period.

NA

7. Actions to Increase Competition:

Describe efforts made to compete the action, including whether a notice was or will be publicized as required by FAR Subpart

5.2 or which exception under FAR 5.202 applies. If a notice was publicized, discuss the number of written responses to the synopsis and the results of the assessment of the written responses. List sources, if any, that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition. Provide rationale if interested sources were rejected. If applicable, state that no other sources have expressed interest, but all offers received shall be considered. Describe what actions will be taken to increase competition before subsequent acquisition of the supplies or services is required. You may state that an action is a one-time requirement, but if a similar requirement arises, every effort will be made to compete it to the maximum extent possible. If action is sole source because of proprietary data or licensing rights and there will be a continuing need for the requirement, there must be evidence that advanced planning has been initiated to overcome the barriers to competition, or there should be documentation to support an analysis that replacement costs/licensing purchase costs outweigh the benefits of competition. If the action is a contract extension or bridge, explain actions to compete the follow-on. If action is an urgent new requirement and a competitive follow-on is anticipated, explain that efforts are underway to facilitate a full and open competition.

NA we will post to Native Owned Small Buisneses, there are a number of Dell resellers.

8. Market Research:

Describe the extent of the market research conducted to identify all qualified sources and the results thereof. “Market Research” is defined as those attempts you made to ascertain whether other qualified sources exist, and can include contact with knowledgeable experts regarding similar or duplicate requirements, contact with industry, results of a sources sought synopsis, or draft solicitations. Research of the marketplace may consist of written, electronic (i.e. email) telephonic, or world wide web inquiries. Lack of advanced planning is not an acceptable reason for the lack of market research, but true urgency may necessitate abbreviated market research that is limited to readily available historical and commercial information. If ac tion is a contract extension or bridge contract, describe the market research efforts underway or completed for the follow-on. See FAR 10.002(b)(2).

Market research identified numerous authorized Dell resellers, including Native-owned and HUBZone small businesses, confirming broad vendor availability despite the brand-name restriction.

Market research was completed under several sources; including reviewing GSA pricing and commercial pricing tools.

This is not a sole-source action; competition will occur among authorized Dell resellers. This justification supports a brand-name

9. Procurement History:

Purchase order or contract number: 75H70624P00847

Was action competed? ✔ Yes

No

If action was not competed, state the cited authority, summarize rationale, and describe the actions that were supposed to be taken to increase competition and the results thereof:

The previous procurement (75H70624P00847) was Indian Small Business Economic Enterprise (ISBEE), and these results informed the current acquisition strategy.

14. Legal Review:

All J&As greater than $68 million must have a legal review from the General Law Division of the Office of the General Counsel prior to sending it to the Department.

15. OPDIV Competition Advocate Approval (Required for proposed contract over $700,000 but not exceeding $13.5 million (value calculated including all options)):

I have reviewed this justification and find that it adequately supports other than full and open competition.

Name: Phone:

Signature: Date:

All J&As greater than $68 million must have a review from the Office of Small & Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) prior to sending it to the Department. The OSDBU at their discretion may review any J&A.

16. Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Review: (Required for contracts exceeding $68 million (value calculated including all options)):

Concur:

Non-Concur:

17. OPDIV HCA Approval (Required for proposed contract over $13.5 million but not exceeding $68 million (value calculated including all options)):

Name: Phone:

Signature: Date:

18. Department Competition Advocate (Required for contracts exceeding $68 million (value calculated including all options)):

Concur:

Non-Concur:

(The below approval paragraph is required if the cumulative contract value, including all options, exceeds $68 million.)

19. HHS Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) Approval:

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve other than full and open competition for the above stated procurement, subject to the availability of funds, and provided that the services herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

State supplies/services being procured:

State the full statutory authority and FAR cite and title, consistent with paragraph 4, e.g. 41 U.S.C. 3304:

ADP7FA4.tmp
JUSTIFICATION AND APPROVAL
2. Description of Action:
3. Description of Services or Supplies:
Actions other than simplified acquisition procedures (select only one and provide an explanation):
6. Bridge Contracts:
7. Actions to Increase Competition:
8. Market Research:
9. Procurement History:
10. Additional Information to support the justification:
14. Legal Review:
$13.5 million (value calculated including all options)):
19. HHS Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) Approval:

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .