Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $20.4M contract for computer systems design services by the U.S. Marshals Service

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,367,774 ($20.4M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2012-09-28

End Date: 2018-03-01

Contract Duration: 1,980 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS

Sector: IT

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: ALEXANDRIA, ALEXANDRIA CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22301

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $20.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 1980 days (approximately 5.4 years) indicates a long-term need for these services. 3. The award type is a Definitive Contract, typically used for straightforward procurement. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541512 points to specialized IT services. 5. The contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, is a large, established firm with significant federal contracting experience. 6. The contract was awarded in Virginia, a common hub for federal contracting activity.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $20.4 million over nearly six years for computer systems design services appears reasonable given the contractor's expertise and the duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale IT service contracts awarded by agencies like the Department of Justice suggests that the pricing structure, while not detailed here, is likely competitive due to the full and open competition. The absence of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes a definitive value-for-money assessment challenging, but the long-term nature of the contract implies sustained demand and perceived value by the U.S. Marshals Service.

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 a bid. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific procurement. While two bidders is not a high number, the 'full and open' designation implies that the process was designed to encourage broad participation. The specific details of the bidding process and the evaluation criteria would provide further insight into the effectiveness of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition, even with a limited number of bidders, generally provides taxpayers with a better opportunity for competitive pricing compared to sole-source or limited solicitations. This process aims to ensure that the government receives the best value by allowing multiple companies to vie for the contract.

Public Impact

The U.S. Marshals Service benefits from enhanced computer systems design capabilities, crucial for its law enforcement and judicial security operations. This contract supports the modernization and efficiency of critical IT infrastructure within a major federal law enforcement agency. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational areas of the U.S. Marshals Service, which has a nationwide presence. The contract likely supports a workforce of skilled IT professionals, both within the contractor's organization and potentially through subcontracting opportunities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined and managed throughout the contract lifecycle.
Dependence on a single large contractor for critical IT systems design could pose risks if performance falters or if the contractor's strategic direction changes.
The long contract duration may lead to challenges in adapting to rapidly evolving technology landscapes without significant change orders.

Positive Signals

Award to a well-established contractor like Booz Allen Hamilton suggests a high likelihood of successful project execution and adherence to standards.
The use of a Definitive Contract indicates a clear understanding of the requirements by the agency.
Full and open competition, even with two bidders, provides a baseline of market validation for the services and pricing.

Sector Analysis

The IT services sector, particularly computer systems design, is a significant area of federal spending. Agencies rely heavily on these services for maintaining and upgrading complex technological infrastructures. This contract fits within the broader category of professional, scientific, and technical services, which consistently represent a large portion of the federal procurement budget. Comparable spending benchmarks for IT systems design services vary widely based on complexity, duration, and agency needs, but contracts in the multi-million dollar range are common for specialized design and integration projects.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large contract awarded to a major federal contractor, it is unlikely to have significant direct subcontracting opportunities specifically targeted at small businesses unless mandated by the prime contractor. The absence of a small business set-aside means that the primary focus was on obtaining the best technical solution and price from the broader market, rather than specifically fostering small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the U.S. Marshals Service contracting officer and program managers. Accountability measures would be embedded within the contract's terms and conditions, including performance standards, reporting requirements, and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS-NG, which provide public access to award details. While no specific Inspector General jurisdiction is mentioned, the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General would likely have oversight authority over contracts within the agency.

Related Government Programs

Department of Justice IT Modernization Programs
U.S. Marshals Service Technology Upgrades
Federal Civilian Agency IT Services Contracts
Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Large-Scale IT Infrastructure Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for technological obsolescence due to long contract duration.
Risk of vendor lock-in with a single large provider.
Limited number of bidders may indicate suboptimal competition.
Performance degradation over extended contract period.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $20.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. IGF::CT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (U.S. Marshals Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-09-28. End: 2018-03-01.

What is the track record of Booz Allen Hamilton with the U.S. Marshals Service and the Department of Justice?

Booz Allen Hamilton has a long and extensive history of contracting with the U.S. Marshals Service and the broader Department of Justice (DOJ). As a major federal contractor, they have secured numerous awards across various service areas, including IT, cybersecurity, management consulting, and program support. Their track record with the USMS likely includes providing similar computer systems design, integration, and support services. While specific performance ratings for individual contracts are not publicly detailed in this summary, their continued success in winning large federal contracts suggests a generally positive performance history and a strong understanding of agency requirements. Analyzing past performance evaluations and any documented issues or successes on prior USMS contracts would provide a more granular view of their reliability and effectiveness in this specific context.

How does the $20.4 million contract value compare to similar computer systems design contracts awarded by federal agencies?

The $20.4 million contract value for computer systems design services over approximately 5.4 years is within the typical range for large-scale IT projects awarded by federal agencies. For context, major IT modernization efforts, system integrations, and cybersecurity design contracts can easily reach tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars. For instance, contracts for enterprise resource planning (ERP) system design, cloud migration strategies, or the development of complex data management platforms often exceed this amount. The U.S. Marshals Service, as a significant law enforcement agency, requires robust and sophisticated IT systems, making a multi-million dollar investment for design services justifiable. Benchmarking against contracts with similar scope, duration, and complexity for agencies like the FBI, DEA, or DHS would provide a more precise comparison, but the awarded amount appears commensurate with the nature of the services and the client agency's needs.

What are the primary risks associated with a long-term contract for computer systems design services?

Long-term contracts for computer systems design services, such as this 5.4-year award, carry several inherent risks. One primary risk is technological obsolescence; the IT landscape evolves rapidly, and systems designed today may be outdated or inefficient by the end of the contract term. This can lead to increased costs for modifications or upgrades. Another risk is vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes heavily reliant on the contractor's proprietary solutions or expertise, making it difficult and costly to switch providers. Performance degradation over time is also a concern, as contractor motivation or resource allocation may shift. Furthermore, changes in agency mission, budget constraints, or regulatory requirements could necessitate significant contract modifications, potentially leading to disputes or reduced value. Effective risk mitigation involves robust contract management, clear performance metrics, flexibility for adaptation, and regular reviews of technological advancements.

How effective is 'full and open competition' when only two bids are received?

The effectiveness of 'full and open competition' when only two bids are received can be viewed from multiple perspectives. On one hand, the process itself adheres to the principle of allowing all responsible sources to compete, which is a foundational element of federal procurement law designed to ensure fair opportunity and maximize competition. The presence of two bidders indicates that at least some market interest existed. However, a low number of bids (two) might suggest potential issues such as overly restrictive requirements, insufficient market research, a lack of qualified vendors in the market, or a perception that the contract's terms or anticipated workload were not attractive enough. While two bidders are better than one (sole source), it may not yield the most robust price discovery or the widest range of innovative solutions compared to a scenario with numerous competitive offers. Therefore, while technically compliant, the competitive intensity might be suboptimal.

What are the potential implications for the U.S. Marshals Service's operational efficiency?

This contract has significant potential implications for the U.S. Marshals Service's operational efficiency. By securing specialized computer systems design services, the agency aims to improve, modernize, or maintain its critical IT infrastructure. Effective systems design can lead to enhanced data management, improved communication networks, more secure information systems, and streamlined workflows for law enforcement operations, case management, and administrative functions. If the design services result in user-friendly, reliable, and secure systems, operational efficiency is likely to increase, enabling agents and staff to perform their duties more effectively and with fewer technological impediments. Conversely, poorly executed design work could lead to system instability, security vulnerabilities, or user frustration, thereby hindering operational efficiency.

What is the historical spending trend for computer systems design services at the Department of Justice?

Historical spending trends for computer systems design services at the Department of Justice (DOJ) generally show a consistent and substantial investment in IT infrastructure and modernization. The DOJ, encompassing numerous law enforcement and judicial agencies, relies heavily on advanced technological solutions to fulfill its mission. Spending in this category typically fluctuates based on major modernization initiatives, cybersecurity upgrades, and the lifecycle of existing systems. Over the past decade, federal agencies, including the DOJ, have increasingly focused on areas like cloud computing, data analytics, and secure network infrastructure, driving demand for sophisticated design and integration services. While specific year-over-year figures for the DOJ's computer systems design spending require detailed analysis of historical procurement data, it is reasonable to assume a multi-billion dollar annual expenditure across the department for various IT services, with a significant portion allocated to design and development.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › ADP AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

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

Address: 8283 GREENSBORO DR, 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: $20,367,774

Exercised Options: $20,367,774

Current Obligation: $20,367,774

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline