CACI, INC.-FEDERAL awarded $33M for administrative management consulting services by the Department of the Army

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $32,994,461 ($33.0M)

Contractor: CACI, Inc.-Federal

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-03-28

End Date: 2010-03-17

Contract Duration: 1,815 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: ATLANTA, FULTON County, GEORGIA, 30310

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $33.0 million to CACI, INC.-FEDERAL for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded under firm-fixed-price terms, indicating predictable costs for the government. 2. The contract was competed fully and openly, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. A significant number of bids were received, potentially driving better pricing. 4. The contract duration of 1815 days (approx. 5 years) suggests a long-term need for these services. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to general management consulting services. 6. The contract was awarded to CACI, INC.-FEDERAL, a known entity in the federal contracting space.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of approximately $33 million over five years for administrative management consulting services appears reasonable given the scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale consulting contracts within the Department of Defense suggests that the overall award value is within expected ranges. The firm-fixed-price contract type helps manage cost predictability. Further analysis would require detailed task orders and deliverables to assess specific value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The fact that 9 bids were received suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of proposed solutions, benefiting the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract likely resulted in more favorable pricing for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario. It ensures that the government is obtaining services at a price that reflects market conditions.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from administrative management and general management consulting services to improve operational efficiency. These services likely support various administrative functions within the Army, contributing to better resource allocation and process optimization. The geographic impact is likely widespread, supporting Army operations across different installations or commands. Workforce implications could include support for government personnel in administrative roles or the direct engagement of contractor personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if task orders are not tightly managed.
Reliance on contractor expertise may reduce internal government capacity over time.
Ensuring consistent quality across all delivered consulting services can be challenging.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive market for these services.
Long contract duration indicates a sustained need and potential for building expertise.

Sector Analysis

Administrative management and general management consulting services represent a significant segment of the federal services market. This contract falls within the professional services sector, which is crucial for supporting government operations across various agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks for large consulting contracts within the Department of Defense often run into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, making this $33 million award a substantial but not outlier figure for a multi-year engagement.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically tied to small business set-asides for this particular award. The primary contractor, CACI, INC.-FEDERAL, is likely a large business, and its subcontracting practices would be governed by broader federal regulations rather than specific set-aside requirements for this contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the administrative contracting officer within the Department of the Army. Performance monitoring, quality assurance, and adherence to contract terms are key oversight mechanisms. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which provide details on awarded contracts. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Management and Financial Consulting, Acquisition and Technology Services
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Defense-wide Administrative Support Services

Risk Flags

Potential for contractor to underperform if cost controls are too aggressive.
Risk of scope creep if requirements are not precisely defined in task orders.
Over-reliance on contractor expertise could diminish internal government capabilities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $33.0 million to CACI, INC.-FEDERAL. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CACI, INC.-FEDERAL.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $33.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-03-28. End: 2010-03-17.

What is CACI, INC.-FEDERAL's track record with the Department of Defense for similar consulting services?

CACI, INC.-FEDERAL has a substantial track record of performing services for the Department of Defense (DoD) across various domains, including management consulting, IT services, and intelligence support. Historical data from federal procurement databases often shows numerous awards to CACI for similar NAICS codes (e.g., 541611) and contract types. Their performance history with the DoD is generally characterized by a mix of positive performance reviews and occasional contract disputes or challenges, which is common for large federal contractors. A detailed review of past performance evaluations and contract close-out reports would provide a more granular understanding of their specific successes and any areas for improvement in delivering administrative management consulting.

How does the awarded amount compare to the average value of administrative management consulting contracts awarded by the Army?

The awarded amount of approximately $33 million over an estimated 5-year period places this contract in the mid-to-large range for administrative management consulting services within the Department of the Army. While the Army procures a vast array of services, contracts for general management and administrative consulting often vary significantly based on scope, duration, and specific requirements. Average values can be difficult to pinpoint without segmenting by specific service types and contract lengths. However, for a multi-year, full-and-open competition contract of this nature, $33 million is a substantial figure that suggests a significant scope of work, likely supporting a broad range of administrative functions or a specific large program.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for consulting services?

The primary risk associated with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract for consulting services lies in the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability if costs exceed estimates. While FFP provides cost certainty for the government, it places the cost risk on the contractor. If unforeseen complexities arise or the scope is not perfectly defined, the contractor may be incentivized to deliver less than optimal quality or to seek change orders. Conversely, the government risks paying a premium if the contractor's initial cost estimates were overly conservative. Effective oversight and clearly defined performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure value is delivered.

What does the number of bidders (9) suggest about the effectiveness of the competition for this contract?

Receiving 9 bids for this administrative management consulting contract strongly suggests that the competition was effective and robust. A higher number of bidders generally indicates that the solicitation was well-publicized, the requirements were clear, and the opportunity was attractive to a diverse range of potential offerors. This level of competition typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award, and it increases the likelihood that the government will receive technically sound proposals at a competitive price. It also suggests that the market has sufficient capacity and interest to meet the government's needs for these services.

How has federal spending on administrative management consulting services (NAICS 541611) trended over the past five years?

Federal spending on administrative management and general management consulting services (NAICS 541611) has generally shown a steady or increasing trend over the past five years. Agencies across the government frequently utilize these services to improve efficiency, implement new policies, manage complex projects, and provide strategic advice. Factors such as evolving technological landscapes, changing regulatory environments, and the need for specialized expertise often drive demand. While specific year-over-year fluctuations occur, the overall trajectory indicates a consistent reliance on external consulting expertise to support government operations and achieve mission objectives.

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: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 14151 PARK MEADOW DRIVE, CHANTILLY, VA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DABK0103D0006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline