Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $176.6M for Space Systems Command ground engineering support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $176,568,358 ($176.6M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2023-11-07

End Date: 2026-11-06

Contract Duration: 1,095 days

Daily Burn Rate: $161.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SPACE SYSTEMS COMMAND (SSC) GROUND SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND INTEGRATION SUPPORT (GSIS) TASK ORDER AWARD.

Place of Performance

Location: EL SEGUNDO, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 90245

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $176.6 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: SPACE SYSTEMS COMMAND (SSC) GROUND SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND INTEGRATION SUPPORT (GSIS) TASK ORDER AWARD. Key points: 1. Contract provides critical engineering and integration services for space systems. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process. 3. Cost-plus award fee structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 4. Long duration of 1095 days indicates a significant, ongoing need. 5. The contract is a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 6. Focus on ground systems engineering is vital for operationalizing space assets.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $176.6 million over three years for engineering services is substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for complex defense systems is necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. The cost-plus award fee (CPAF) structure allows for contractor reimbursement of allowable costs plus a fee that is adjusted based on performance. While CPAF can incentivize desired outcomes, it necessitates rigorous performance monitoring to ensure costs remain reasonable and the fee is justified by exceptional performance. Without specific comparable data, it's difficult to definitively state if the pricing is optimal, but the competitive award suggests a reasonable market-based outcome.

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 offers. The presence of 5 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant engineering support requirement. A competitive process like this generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more innovative solutions as contractors vie for the award. The agency's decision to use full and open competition implies confidence that the market could adequately meet the requirement.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices and a wider range of technical solutions, ensuring the government receives the best value for its investment in critical space systems support.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Space Systems Command (SSC) and the U.S. Space Force, receiving essential engineering and integration support for ground systems. Services delivered include systems engineering, integration, testing, and sustainment for critical space infrastructure. The contract's geographic impact is likely centered around SSC facilities, primarily in California, and potentially other operational sites. Workforce implications include the employment of highly skilled engineers and technical professionals by Booz Allen Hamilton and its potential subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus award fee contracts require diligent oversight to ensure costs are controlled and the award fee is earned through demonstrable performance.
The long contract duration necessitates ongoing performance monitoring to ensure continued alignment with evolving space system needs.
Reliance on a single large prime contractor for critical systems engineering could pose risks if not managed effectively.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive marketplace for these services.
Booz Allen Hamilton is a well-established contractor with significant experience in defense and aerospace.
The contract supports critical national security space capabilities, aligning with strategic defense priorities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting the defense and aerospace industry's complex ground systems for space operations. The market for such specialized engineering and integration support is characterized by a few large, experienced contractors capable of handling the technical and security requirements. Spending in this area is driven by the continuous need to develop, deploy, and maintain sophisticated space-based assets and their supporting infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large engineering support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense for major weapon systems or complex IT infrastructure.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the prime contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, is a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding small business subcontracting goals or performance. The impact on the small business ecosystem will depend on whether Booz Allen Hamilton actively seeks to subcontract portions of this work to qualified small businesses, which is a common practice in large defense contracts.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Space Systems Command contracting office and program management personnel. Performance will be monitored against the requirements outlined in the task order and the criteria for the award fee. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms and potential reviews by oversight bodies like the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or the Inspector General, depending on the nature of any issues that may arise. The CPAF structure itself implies a level of oversight tied to performance evaluations.

Related Government Programs

Space Systems Command (SSC) Operations
Ground Systems Engineering
Aerospace Engineering Services
Defense Contract Management
National Security Space Programs
Systems Integration Support

Risk Flags

Cost-plus award fee requires diligent oversight.
Long contract duration necessitates sustained performance monitoring.
Potential for cost overruns inherent in CPAF structure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $176.6 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. SPACE SYSTEMS COMMAND (SSC) GROUND SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND INTEGRATION SUPPORT (GSIS) TASK ORDER AWARD.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $176.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-11-07. End: 2026-11-06.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with similar large-scale engineering and integration contracts for the Department of Defense, particularly within the space domain?

Booz Allen Hamilton has a long and extensive history of supporting the Department of Defense (DoD) and intelligence agencies across a wide range of services, including systems engineering, integration, IT, and strategic consulting. They are a prime contractor on numerous large, complex programs, including those related to space systems. Their experience often involves providing technical expertise, program management, and lifecycle support for critical defense capabilities. Specific to space, they have been involved in supporting various aspects of space acquisition, operations, and modernization. While this specific task order is for GSIS, Booz Allen's broader portfolio demonstrates a capacity to handle such significant contracts. A deeper dive into their past performance ratings and any past performance issues on similar contracts would provide further insight into their suitability for this role.

How does the $176.6 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar ground systems engineering and integration support for the Space Force?

To accurately compare the $176.6 million contract value, one would need to analyze historical spending data for similar ground systems engineering and integration support contracts awarded by the Space Force or its predecessor organizations (like Air Force Space Command). This would involve identifying contracts with comparable scopes of work, durations, and technical complexities. Factors such as inflation, technological advancements, and evolving mission requirements influence year-over-year spending. Without access to a comprehensive database of historical contract awards and their specific details, a precise benchmark is challenging. However, given the critical nature of space ground systems and the typical costs associated with large-scale engineering efforts in the defense sector, this value appears to be within a plausible range for a multi-year, comprehensive support contract.

What are the primary performance metrics and award fee criteria used to evaluate Booz Allen Hamilton's performance under this contract?

The specific performance metrics and award fee criteria for this contract are detailed within the task order's Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the contract's clauses related to the Cost-Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure. Typically, these metrics would align with the critical aspects of systems engineering and integration support, such as meeting technical milestones, adhering to schedules, managing costs effectively, delivering high-quality documentation, and ensuring the reliability and performance of the ground systems. The award fee is designed to incentivize exceptional performance beyond minimum requirements. The evaluation process would involve regular assessments by the government's Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and technical monitors, who would score the contractor's performance against the defined criteria, leading to the determination of the fee amount.

What are the potential risks associated with a Cost-Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract structure for this type of engineering support, and how are they mitigated?

The primary risk with a CPAF contract is that the government may pay higher total costs compared to a fixed-price contract, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fee. There's also a risk that the contractor might focus on maximizing costs to increase the fee base, or that the award fee criteria might not perfectly align with the government's true priorities, leading to unintended behaviors. Mitigation strategies employed by the government include rigorous oversight of allowable costs, clear and measurable performance metrics tied to the award fee, regular performance reviews, and strong contract administration. The government must actively manage the contract, ensuring that the fee is only awarded for truly exceptional performance and that costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract.

How does this contract contribute to the overall mission effectiveness and modernization efforts of the Space Systems Command?

This contract is fundamental to the mission effectiveness and modernization of the Space Systems Command (SSC) by ensuring the robust engineering, integration, and sustainment of its ground systems. These ground systems are the critical interface between space assets and the warfighters or users who rely on them. Effective engineering support ensures that these systems are reliable, secure, and capable of supporting current and future space missions. Modernization efforts often involve integrating new technologies, upgrading existing infrastructure, and adapting systems to evolving threats and operational requirements. The expertise provided by Booz Allen Hamilton under this contract directly supports these goals, enabling SSC to maintain and enhance its operational capabilities in a rapidly changing space environment.

What is the anticipated duration and potential for follow-on work or contract extensions beyond the stated end date?

The contract has a stated duration of 1095 days, which equates to exactly three years, from November 7, 2023, to November 6, 2026. This duration suggests a significant, long-term need for the services provided. While the current award is for a specific period, it is common for large, critical support contracts like this, especially those awarded as delivery orders under IDIQ vehicles, to have options for extension or to be followed by subsequent contracts. The continued need for ground systems engineering and integration support for space assets, coupled with the contractor's performance, would be key factors in determining the likelihood of follow-on work or extensions. Agencies often structure contracts to allow for flexibility based on evolving requirements and budget availability.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering 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

Solicitation ID: 47QFCA23R0040

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation

Address: 8283 GREENSBORO DR, MC LEAN, 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: $531,393,635

Exercised Options: $317,092,265

Current Obligation: $176,568,358

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 43

Total Subaward Amount: $70,501,729

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU108

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline