Commerce Department's Patent Office awards $13.7M for management consulting, exceeding initial estimates

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,661,824 ($13.7M)

Contractor: Grant Thornton LLP

Awarding Agency: Department of Commerce

Start Date: 2022-06-25

End Date: 2024-02-29

Contract Duration: 614 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS

Sector: Other

Official Description: AGILE OCIO JUNE 2022 TASK ORDER: 1333BJ18A00180001 POP 6/25/2022 TO 06/24/2023

Place of Performance

Location: CHICAGO, COOK County, ILLINOIS, 60601

State: Illinois Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Commerce obligated $13.7 million to GRANT THORNTON LLP for work described as: AGILE OCIO JUNE 2022 TASK ORDER: 1333BJ18A00180001 POP 6/25/2022 TO 06/24/2023 Key points: 1. The contract's value of $13.7 million appears high for administrative management consulting services, warranting a closer look at the scope and deliverables. 2. While awarded under full and open competition, the limited duration of the task order (one year) suggests a focused, short-term need. 3. The contractor, Grant Thornton LLP, has a significant presence in government contracting, indicating experience but also potential for higher pricing. 4. The use of 'Labor Hours' contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently, posing a risk to budget adherence. 5. The contract's performance period extends beyond the initial task order end date, suggesting potential for modifications or extensions. 6. The 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' NAICS code is broad, making direct comparisons difficult without specific service details.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $13.7 million for administrative management consulting services seems substantial. Benchmarking against similar contracts for management consulting at agencies like the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) or other Commerce Department bureaus would be necessary to determine if this represents good value. The 'Labor Hours' pricing structure, while flexible, can sometimes lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if not closely monitored for efficiency. Without detailed deliverables, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money.

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 offers. This suggests a competitive process was intended. However, the number of bidders is not provided, which is crucial for understanding the actual level of competition. A robust competition typically involves multiple bidders vying for the contract, driving down prices and improving service quality. The absence of this detail limits the assessment of price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible price and quality through a wide range of potential providers.

Public Impact

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is the primary beneficiary, receiving administrative and management consulting services. These services are intended to support the operational efficiency and management functions of the USPTO. The geographic impact is primarily within the USPTO's operational locations, likely Washington D.C. and its field offices. The contract supports professional services roles, potentially impacting management consultants and administrative staff within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Labor Hours' contract type introduces risk of cost escalation if not meticulously managed and monitored for efficiency.
The broad NAICS code 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' makes it difficult to ascertain the specific value and necessity of the services without further detail.
The contract value of $13.7 million, while awarded competitively, appears high for the stated service category and warrants scrutiny regarding the scope of work.
The performance period extending significantly beyond the initial task order end date could indicate potential scope creep or unforeseen project needs, impacting budget predictability.

Positive Signals

Awarded under 'Full and Open Competition,' suggesting a deliberate effort to engage a broad market and potentially achieve competitive pricing.
The contractor, Grant Thornton LLP, is a well-established firm with significant experience in government contracting, implying a level of reliability and expertise.
The contract is associated with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, a critical agency, suggesting the services are likely aligned with important governmental functions.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically management and administrative consulting. This is a large and diverse market within the federal government, with agencies frequently procuring these services to improve efficiency, implement new strategies, or manage complex projects. Spending in this category can range widely, from small, targeted engagements to large, multi-year programs. The federal government's reliance on external expertise for management consulting is a consistent trend across various departments and agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large contract awarded to Grant Thornton LLP, a major firm, it is unlikely that significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses will be a primary focus unless explicitly mandated. The absence of small business participation goals or set-asides suggests that the primary objective was to secure specialized expertise from a large, established provider, potentially limiting direct benefits to the small business ecosystem for this specific award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's contracting officers and program managers. The contract's performance would be monitored against the defined scope of work and deliverables. Transparency is generally facilitated through federal procurement databases like FPDS.gov, where contract actions are reported. Specific Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on the nature of any potential fraud, waste, or abuse identified within the Department of Commerce.

Related Government Programs

Management and Consulting Services
Administrative Support Services
Federal IT Consulting
Government Operations Improvement
Professional Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to 'Labor Hours' contract type.
Lack of specific details on deliverables makes value assessment difficult.
High contract value for the stated service category warrants scrutiny.
Limited information on the number of bidders in the 'Full and Open Competition'.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Commerce awarded $13.7 million to GRANT THORNTON LLP. AGILE OCIO JUNE 2022 TASK ORDER: 1333BJ18A00180001 POP 6/25/2022 TO 06/24/2023

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRANT THORNTON LLP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Commerce (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-06-25. End: 2024-02-29.

What specific management and administrative consulting services are being provided under this task order, and how do they align with the USPTO's strategic goals?

The provided data identifies the NAICS code as '541611 - Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services.' However, it does not detail the specific services rendered. These services could range from strategic planning, organizational restructuring, process improvement, policy development, to operational efficiency enhancements. To understand the alignment with USPTO's strategic goals, one would need to review the Statement of Work (SOW) for this specific task order. Typically, such consulting engagements aim to support the USPTO in areas like intellectual property application processing, patent examination, trademark registration, or internal administrative functions. Without the SOW, the precise contribution remains speculative, but it is reasonable to assume the services are intended to bolster the USPTO's core mission delivery or operational effectiveness.

How does the $13.7 million contract value compare to typical spending on similar management consulting services at the USPTO or comparable federal agencies?

Benchmarking the $13.7 million contract value requires comparing it against similar 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' (NAICS 541611) awarded by the USPTO or other federal agencies of similar size and mission scope. Federal procurement data (e.g., FPDS) can be queried for contracts with comparable NAICS codes, contract types (Labor Hours), and performance periods. Given that this is a task order under a BPA Call, the total value might represent a portion of a larger framework agreement. However, $13.7 million for a single task order, even over a period potentially extending beyond a year, is a significant sum. Without specific comparable contract data, it's difficult to definitively state if it's high or low. Factors like the complexity of the issues addressed, the level of expertise required, and the duration of the engagement heavily influence pricing. A preliminary assessment suggests it is on the higher end for a single task order, warranting scrutiny of the scope and deliverables.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the success of Grant Thornton LLP's services under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or metrics for evaluating Grant Thornton LLP's performance. In federal contracts, particularly for consulting services, KPIs are typically defined within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS). These metrics are crucial for assessing whether the contractor is meeting the government's requirements and delivering the expected value. Common KPIs for management consulting might include adherence to project timelines, quality of deliverables (e.g., reports, recommendations), achievement of specific process improvements, cost savings realized, or stakeholder satisfaction. The 'IL' (Illinois) status code might relate to contract administration or performance location, but doesn't directly inform KPIs. Without access to the SOW/PWS, a detailed understanding of performance evaluation is not possible.

What is Grant Thornton LLP's track record with the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office specifically, in terms of past performance and contract compliance?

Grant Thornton LLP is a large, well-established professional services firm with extensive experience in government contracting across various federal agencies, including the Department of Commerce and its sub-agencies like the USPTO. While the provided data confirms they are the contractor for this specific task order, it does not detail their historical performance record with these entities. Generally, firms of Grant Thornton's size have a substantial portfolio of past contracts. Assessing their track record would involve reviewing their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any past disputes or contract terminations, and the overall history of their engagements with the USPTO and Commerce. A positive track record typically involves successful delivery, compliance with contract terms, and positive feedback from government clients, which is often a factor in award decisions for new contracts.

Given the 'Labor Hours' (PT) contract type, what mechanisms are in place to prevent cost overruns and ensure efficient service delivery?

The 'Labor Hours' (PT) contract type, while offering flexibility, inherently carries a risk of cost overruns if not managed stringently. To mitigate this, federal contracts typically incorporate several oversight mechanisms. These include detailed requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW) specifying the types of labor, estimated hours, and labor categories allowed. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) or Contracting Officer (CO) plays a critical role in monitoring the contractor's progress, approving timesheets, and ensuring that the work performed aligns with the SOW and budget. Task orders often have ceiling prices, and the government has the right to audit contractor labor charges. Furthermore, regular progress meetings and performance reviews help identify potential inefficiencies or scope creep early on, allowing for corrective actions. The contract's duration (POP 6/25/2022 TO 06/24/2023, with an end date of 02/29/2024) suggests a defined period, and the total obligation amount ($13,661,823.60) acts as a financial ceiling for this specific task order.

What is the significance of the 'BPA CALL' award type (AW) in the context of this contract?

The 'BPA CALL' award type signifies that this contract action is a task order issued under a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA). A BPA is a simplified way to fill anticipated repetitive needs for supplies or services by establishing 'charge accounts' with qualified sources of supply. Essentially, it's a pre-negotiated agreement that allows government agencies to quickly place orders against established contract terms and conditions, often with pre-determined pricing or pricing structures. A 'BPA CALL' specifically refers to an order placed against a BPA that was established using full and open competition. This method streamlines the procurement process for recurring needs, allowing the USPTO to efficiently obtain management consulting services without needing to conduct a full, separate procurement for each individual requirement. It implies that the foundational BPA itself underwent a competitive process.

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

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1000 WILSON BLVD STE 1400, ARLINGTON, VA, 22209

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,661,824

Exercised Options: $13,661,824

Current Obligation: $13,661,824

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 1333BJ18A00180001

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline