State Department awards $3.18M follow-on contract for IMAC continuity of services to Guidehouse LLP

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,177,571 ($3.2M)

Contractor: Guidehouse LLP

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2025-05-01

End Date: 2026-07-31

Contract Duration: 456 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FOLLOW ON FOR IMAC CONTINUITY OF SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20520

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $3.2 million to GUIDEHOUSE LLP for work described as: FOLLOW ON FOR IMAC CONTINUITY OF SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting price competition. 2. Follow-on nature suggests potential for contractor lock-in and reduced market pressure. 3. Fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 4. Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services are critical for operational continuity. 5. Contract duration of 456 days indicates a medium-term need for these services. 6. Awarded to a single vendor, raising questions about broader market engagement.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of $3.18 million over approximately 15 months for IMAC continuity of services appears reasonable given the critical nature of maintaining operational support. However, without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to benchmark the pricing against market rates or alternative providers. The fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the lack of competition may have led to a higher-than-optimal price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed under SAP (Simplified Acquisition Procedures) and was awarded on a sole-source basis. This indicates that the agency likely determined that only one vendor could meet the specific requirements for this follow-on service. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from multiple bids to drive down costs or explore innovative solutions from a wider pool of contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: The sole-source award limits the government's ability to secure the best possible price through competitive negotiation, potentially resulting in higher costs for taxpayers.

Public Impact

The Department of State benefits from uninterrupted IT infrastructure management and support services. Ensures continuity of essential administrative and management functions critical to agency operations. Services are delivered within the District of Columbia, impacting federal operations in the capital. Supports a workforce involved in IT management and administrative support roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing.
Follow-on nature may indicate a lack of proactive market research for alternatives.
Absence of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Contract aims to ensure continuity of essential services, mitigating operational disruption.
Award to an existing contractor may leverage established knowledge and reduce ramp-up time.

Sector Analysis

The Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services sector is broad, encompassing a wide range of support functions for government agencies. This contract falls within the IT services sub-sector, specifically focusing on the continuity of operations for IT infrastructure and related administrative management. Comparable spending in this area often involves significant investments to ensure system reliability and operational resilience, with contract values varying widely based on scope and duration.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to Guidehouse LLP, a large business, suggests that the primary focus was on meeting the specific service requirements rather than promoting small business participation. This may limit opportunities for small businesses to engage in providing these critical continuity of services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of State's contracting officer and program managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, with less public visibility into the justification and negotiation process compared to a fully competed contract.

Related Government Programs

IT Infrastructure Management
Continuity of Operations Planning
Administrative Support Services
Management Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for higher cost

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $3.2 million to GUIDEHOUSE LLP. FOLLOW ON FOR IMAC CONTINUITY OF SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GUIDEHOUSE LLP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-05-01. End: 2026-07-31.

What is the track record of Guidehouse LLP in providing IMAC continuity of services to the Department of State or similar agencies?

Guidehouse LLP has a significant presence in providing management consulting and IT services to federal agencies, including the Department of State. As this is a follow-on contract, it implies prior successful performance in a related capacity. Their expertise often spans areas like IT modernization, operational efficiency, and strategic planning. While specific details on past IMAC continuity performance would require deeper analysis of their contract history, their general profile suggests they are well-positioned to handle such requirements. Benchmarking their performance against industry standards and other large consulting firms would provide a clearer picture of their value proposition.

How does the pricing of this $3.18 million contract compare to similar IMAC continuity of services contracts awarded by the Department of State or other agencies?

Directly comparing the pricing of this $3.18 million contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and the specific scope of 'IMAC continuity of services.' Typically, competitive bids allow for robust price benchmarking. However, general market rates for IT infrastructure management and continuity services for large federal agencies can range significantly. Factors influencing cost include the complexity of the systems, the level of support required (24/7 vs. business hours), the number of users or devices supported, and the specific technologies involved. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns or comparable sole-source justifications, it's difficult to definitively assess if this price is optimal, though the fixed-price nature provides some cost control.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding a follow-on contract on a sole-source basis for critical IT continuity services?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source, follow-on award for critical IT continuity services include a lack of competitive pressure, which can lead to inflated pricing and reduced incentive for innovation. There's also the risk of contractor lock-in, where the incumbent's deep knowledge of the systems makes it difficult and costly to switch providers in the future. Furthermore, sole-source awards may bypass opportunities to discover more cost-effective or technologically superior solutions that could have emerged from a competitive bidding process. This can also raise concerns about fairness and equal opportunity for other qualified vendors.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring the successful delivery of IMAC continuity of services?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring the successful delivery of well-defined services like IMAC continuity because it places the primary cost risk on the contractor. This incentivizes the contractor to manage resources efficiently and deliver the specified services within the agreed-upon budget. For continuity services, where the scope is often predictable (maintaining existing systems and processes), FFP provides cost certainty for the government. However, if unforeseen technical challenges arise that significantly impact the contractor's costs, it could lead to disputes or a reduction in the quality of service if not managed carefully.

What is the historical spending pattern for IMAC continuity of services at the Department of State, and how does this award fit within that trend?

Analyzing the historical spending patterns for IMAC continuity of services at the Department of State would require access to detailed historical contract data. However, it is common for large federal agencies to have ongoing, significant investments in maintaining the continuity of their IT infrastructure and administrative operations. Follow-on contracts like this one suggest a sustained need for these services. If the Department of State has consistently relied on external support for IMAC continuity, this award aligns with that trend. Variations in spending year-over-year could be influenced by budget cycles, system upgrades, or changes in agency priorities. This specific award's value and duration provide a snapshot of current spending in this area.

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) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED UNDER SAP

Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION

Solicitation ID: 191NLE25R0029

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Veritas Capital Fund Management, L.L.C.

Address: 1676 INTERNATIONAL DR STE 800, MCLEAN, VA, 22102

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $6,398,487

Exercised Options: $3,177,571

Current Obligation: $3,177,571

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 19AQMM19A0281

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline