Booz Allen Hamilton contract for economic development consulting services awarded by USAID

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,684,155 ($11.7M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Agency for International Development

Start Date: 2006-09-30

End Date: 2011-03-20

Contract Duration: 1,632 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.2K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: THE PURPOSE OF THIS TASK ORDER IS TO PROMOTE IMPROVED BUSINESS CLIMATES, SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND TRANSFORMATIONAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH REFORM OF COMMERCIAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY-BUILDING IN TARGET COUNTRIES.

Place of Performance

Location: PHILADELPHIA, PHILADELPHIA County, PENNSYLVANIA, 19178

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Agency for International Development obligated $11.7 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: THE PURPOSE OF THIS TASK ORDER IS TO PROMOTE IMPROVED BUSINESS CLIMATES, SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND TRANSFORMATIONAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH REFORM OF COMMERCIAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY-BUILDING IN TARGET COUNTRIES. Key points: 1. Contract focused on improving business climates and economic growth in target countries. 2. Utilized a competitive delivery order, suggesting a degree of market engagement. 3. The contract duration of 1632 days indicates a significant, long-term project. 4. Services provided fall under Administrative Management and General Management Consulting. 5. The contract was awarded under a Time and Materials pricing structure. 6. The total award amount of over $11.6 million warrants scrutiny for value. 7. The contract was not set aside for small businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's value of over $11.6 million for consulting services over approximately 4.5 years needs careful benchmarking against similar USAID-funded economic development initiatives. Without specific performance metrics or deliverables, assessing value for money is challenging. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not closely managed, making oversight critical. Comparing the per-diem rates to industry standards for management consulting in international development would provide further insight into the pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that multiple vendors likely had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 5 bids suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specific task order. However, the nature of the underlying contract vehicle (not specified) and the specific competition dynamics for this order would provide a clearer picture of how effectively market forces were leveraged to achieve the best price and value.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally benefits taxpayers by fostering price discovery and potentially leading to more cost-effective solutions. The fact that multiple bids were received suggests that taxpayer funds were likely not committed to a single provider without exploring alternatives.

Public Impact

Target countries seeking to improve their business climates and achieve sustained economic growth are the primary beneficiaries. The contract aims to deliver reforms in commercial laws, regulations, and institutional capacity-building. The geographic impact is focused on specific 'target countries' as defined by USAID. Workforce implications may include the engagement of consultants and local capacity development within the target countries.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials pricing can lead to unpredictable costs if not managed rigorously.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true impact and value.
The broad scope of 'transformational development' could lead to scope creep and cost increases.
Geographic focus on 'target countries' may not be clearly defined, impacting accountability.

Positive Signals

Awarded through a competitive process, indicating potential for better value.
Focus on economic development and institutional capacity building aligns with USAID's mission.
Long contract duration suggests a commitment to sustained impact.
Booz Allen Hamilton is a well-established contractor with experience in government consulting.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Management and Consulting Services sector, specifically focusing on administrative and general management consulting. This sector is crucial for government agencies like USAID, which rely on external expertise to implement complex development programs. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized skills. Benchmarking this contract's value would involve comparing its total value and duration against other USAID or similar international development consulting contracts, as well as against the typical cost structures for management consulting engagements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This means the competition was likely open to a broader range of contractors, including large businesses. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without this data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though it suggests opportunities for large prime contractors to engage small business subcontractors if they choose.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Agency for International Development (USAID). As a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle, oversight mechanisms would be tied to the terms of that vehicle. Transparency would depend on USAID's reporting practices for task orders and the public availability of performance reports. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any concerns regarding fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

USAID Economic Growth Programs
International Development Consulting Services
Management and Business Consulting Services
Commercial Law Reform Initiatives
Institutional Capacity Building Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
Lack of clearly defined performance metrics hinders impact assessment.
Broad scope ('transformational development') may lead to scope creep.
Effectiveness of reforms in target countries is difficult to ascertain without specific data.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Agency for International Development awarded $11.7 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. THE PURPOSE OF THIS TASK ORDER IS TO PROMOTE IMPROVED BUSINESS CLIMATES, SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND TRANSFORMATIONAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH REFORM OF COMMERCIAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY-BUILDING IN TARGET COUNTRIES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Agency for International Development (Agency for International Development).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-30. End: 2011-03-20.

What specific performance metrics were established to measure the success of the economic development reforms and capacity-building efforts in the target countries?

The provided data does not include specific performance metrics for this task order. Typically, contracts of this nature would outline Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) related to improvements in business registration times, changes in regulatory frameworks, increased foreign direct investment, or enhanced institutional effectiveness. Without these metrics, it is challenging to quantitatively assess the contract's success and the value delivered to the taxpayer and the recipient countries. Further review of the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and any associated performance work statements would be necessary to identify these crucial evaluation criteria.

How does the total contract value of over $11.6 million compare to similar USAID economic development consulting contracts awarded over the same period?

Comparing this contract's value requires context regarding the scope and duration of similar USAID economic development consulting contracts. Contracts focused on broad, multi-year, transformational development initiatives in multiple countries would naturally command higher values than shorter-term, geographically limited projects. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze a portfolio of USAID contracts with similar objectives (e.g., commercial law reform, institutional capacity building) awarded between 2006 and 2011. Factors such as the number of countries involved, the complexity of the reforms, and the specific consulting services rendered would influence the benchmark value. However, $11.6 million over five years suggests a substantial investment in development assistance consulting.

What were the primary risks identified during the procurement process for this contract, and what mitigation strategies were put in place?

The provided data does not detail the specific risks identified during the procurement for this task order. Common risks in international development consulting include political instability in target countries, challenges in implementing regulatory reforms, potential for corruption, difficulties in achieving buy-in from local stakeholders, and contractor performance issues. Mitigation strategies typically involve thorough country assessments, robust monitoring and evaluation plans, clear communication protocols, strong anti-fraud measures, and performance-based contract clauses. The competitive nature of the award may have helped mitigate risks related to contractor capability, assuming a thorough evaluation process was followed.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with USAID for similar economic development or management consulting contracts?

Booz Allen Hamilton is a large, established government contractor with extensive experience across various federal agencies, including USAID. They have a history of performing management and consulting services, often involving complex program support and strategic advice. While specific details on their track record with USAID for economic development consulting are not in the provided data, their general profile suggests they possess the organizational capacity and expertise to handle such contracts. A deeper dive into USAID's contract database or performance evaluations would reveal specific project successes, challenges, and client satisfaction levels for their past work with the agency in this domain.

How did the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure influence the final cost compared to a fixed-price contract for this type of service?

The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure for this contract means that the final cost is based on the actual hours worked by contractor personnel and the direct costs incurred, plus a fee. This structure offers flexibility, particularly when the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset or is expected to evolve, as is common in development consulting. However, it carries a higher risk of cost overruns for the government if not managed diligently, as there is less incentive for the contractor to control hours. A fixed-price contract, conversely, would have established a set cost regardless of the effort expended, providing greater cost certainty for the government but potentially limiting flexibility or leading to a higher initial bid price to account for contractor risk.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (UEI: 964725688)

Address: 8283 GREENSBORO DRIVE, MCLEAN, VA, 22102

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $86,908,343

Exercised Options: $59,618,617

Current Obligation: $11,684,155

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: AIDAFPI000400005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline