Department of the Army's $529M contract for administrative management consulting services awarded to Science Applications International Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $529,373,186 ($529.4M)

Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2016-04-01

End Date: 2019-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $483.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF EXERCISE OPTIONS, NEW TASK ORDER NUMBER REQUIRED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES AS 0037 AND 0038 RAN OUT OF ACRNS.

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $529.4 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF EXERCISE OPTIONS, NEW TASK ORDER NUMBER REQUIRED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES AS 0037 AND 0038 RAN OUT OF ACRNS. Key points: 1. The contract value of over $529 million indicates a significant investment in management consulting services. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, this suggests a robust market for these services. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to control costs by establishing a set price. 4. The duration of the contract (1094 days) suggests a long-term need for these consulting services. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to a focus on general management consulting. 6. The contract was awarded to a single contractor, Science Applications International Corporation. 7. The contract was issued as a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) Call, indicating it's a specific order against a pre-existing agreement.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific deliverables or performance metrics. However, the total award amount of over $529 million for administrative management consulting services over approximately three years is substantial. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests an attempt to manage cost certainty. Further analysis would require comparing the scope of services and outcomes to similar large-scale consulting engagements within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The number of bidders is not specified in the provided data, but the designation implies a competitive process. This level of competition is generally expected to drive better pricing and service offerings as contractors vie for the award.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is favorable for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through competitive bidding and encourages a wider range of innovative solutions.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely Department of the Army personnel and leadership who receive support in administrative and general management functions. The services delivered are expected to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Army administrative operations. The contract's geographic impact is primarily within Alabama, as indicated by the 'AL' state code. Workforce implications could include the direct employment of consultants by Science Applications International Corporation and potential impacts on existing Army administrative staff through process improvements or role adjustments.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value for money.
The large contract value could indicate a potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single contractor for such a broad scope of services might limit flexibility.
The 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' category is broad and could encompass a wide range of activities, making oversight crucial.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive environment that should yield good value.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term need that has been identified and planned for.
The contractor, Science Applications International Corporation, is a well-established entity in government contracting, implying experience and capability.

Sector Analysis

The administrative management and general management consulting services sector is a significant component of the federal contracting landscape, supporting various agencies in optimizing their operations. This contract, valued at over $529 million, represents a substantial portion of spending within this specific service category for the Department of the Army. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the average contract values for similar consulting services across different branches of the military and other federal departments over similar timeframes.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) was false and there was no small business set-aside (ss) for this contract. This suggests that the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses, and large businesses were likely the primary bidders and awardees. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited, although subcontracting opportunities could potentially exist if SAIC chooses to engage small businesses for specific tasks.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, which obligates the contractor to deliver services within the agreed-upon budget. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is publicly available. The specific Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on the Army's internal structure and the nature of any potential issues.

Related Government Programs

Management and Financial Consulting, Acquisition and Technology Services
Professional Services
Defense-wide Administrative Support Contracts
Army Consulting Services
Strategic Planning and Management Support

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep despite firm-fixed-price structure.
Difficulty in objectively measuring consulting service effectiveness.
Risk of contractor over-reliance and potential vendor lock-in.
Ensuring adequate oversight for a large, long-duration contract.
Personnel turnover impacting service continuity.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $529.4 million to SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION. IGF::CT::IGF EXERCISE OPTIONS, NEW TASK ORDER NUMBER REQUIRED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES AS 0037 AND 0038 RAN OUT OF ACRNS.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $529.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2016-04-01. End: 2019-03-31.

What is the track record of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) with the Department of the Army for similar consulting services?

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) has a long and extensive history of contracting with the Department of the Army and other federal agencies, providing a wide array of services including management consulting, IT solutions, and engineering support. For the Department of the Army specifically, SAIC has been awarded numerous contracts over the years, many of which fall under the broad categories of professional services and administrative support. Analyzing SAIC's past performance on similar large-scale, firm-fixed-price contracts with the Army would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, on-time delivery rates, and adherence to budget constraints. While this specific contract is for administrative management and general management consulting, SAIC's broader experience in supporting complex government operations suggests a capacity to handle such requirements. However, a detailed assessment would necessitate examining specific past performance data related to this type of service and agency.

How does the value of this contract compare to other administrative management consulting contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

The total contract value of over $529 million for administrative management and general management consulting services is substantial, placing it among significant investments in this sector by the Department of the Army. To benchmark this value, one would typically compare it against the average and median contract values for similar NAICS codes (e.g., 541611) awarded by the Army over comparable periods. For instance, if the average contract for these services over a 3-year period is in the range of $100-$200 million, then this $529 million contract is considerably larger. Conversely, if the Army frequently awards multi-hundred-million-dollar contracts for large-scale operational support and management consulting, this award might be within the expected range. Without access to a comprehensive database of Army consulting contracts and their values, a precise comparison is difficult, but the scale suggests a major, potentially enterprise-wide, initiative or a long-standing, high-demand service requirement.

What are the primary risks associated with a contract of this magnitude and duration for consulting services?

Contracts of this magnitude ($529M) and duration (approx. 3 years) for consulting services carry several inherent risks. A primary risk is the potential for scope creep, where the services requested expand beyond the original intent, leading to cost overruns or delays, despite the firm-fixed-price structure. Another significant risk is the contractor's ability to deliver the promised value; consulting outcomes can be subjective, and measuring the true impact on administrative efficiency can be challenging, potentially leading to dissatisfaction or failure to achieve desired improvements. There's also a risk of vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes overly reliant on the contractor, making it difficult to transition to new solutions or internal capabilities. Furthermore, personnel turnover within the contractor's team could disrupt service continuity and knowledge transfer. Finally, ensuring robust oversight and accountability over such a large and potentially complex engagement is critical to mitigate these risks.

How effective are firm-fixed-price contracts in managing costs for broad administrative consulting services?

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally considered effective tools for managing costs when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks are understood. For broad administrative consulting services, FFP can provide cost certainty for the government, as the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. This structure incentivizes the contractor to be efficient and manage their resources effectively to maintain profitability. However, the effectiveness can be diminished if the scope is not clearly delineated from the outset, leading to disputes or change orders. In cases of very broad or evolving consulting needs, an FFP contract might require meticulous definition of deliverables and performance standards to prevent ambiguity. While it caps the government's financial exposure, it might also disincentivize the contractor from proposing innovative, potentially more costly but ultimately more beneficial solutions if they fall outside the strict scope.

What is the historical spending pattern for administrative management and general management consulting services by the Department of the Army?

Historical spending patterns for administrative management and general management consulting services by the Department of the Army typically show a consistent demand for such support, driven by the complexity of military operations and the need for organizational efficiency. Spending in this category often fluctuates based on strategic priorities, budget allocations, and specific program requirements. Large-scale contracts, like the one awarded to SAIC, are not uncommon for major initiatives or ongoing support functions. Analyzing historical data would reveal trends in contract values, the number of awards, and the primary service providers. Factors such as force structure changes, modernization efforts, and efficiency drives within the Army can influence the volume and value of consulting contracts awarded over time. Generally, the Army relies on external expertise to supplement internal capabilities in areas like strategic planning, process improvement, and administrative system optimization.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12010, SUNSET HILLS ROAD, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $540,713,726

Exercised Options: $529,373,186

Current Obligation: $529,373,186

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W31P4Q15A0024

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline