DoD's $19.8M contract for warfighter product support awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,813,613 ($19.8M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-07-30

End Date: 2013-07-29

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: ON DEMAND LIFE CYCLE PRODUCT SUPPORT FOR WARFIGHTER PROGRAMS

Place of Performance

Location: INDIAN HEAD, CHARLES County, MARYLAND, 20640, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.8 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: ON DEMAND LIFE CYCLE PRODUCT SUPPORT FOR WARFIGHTER PROGRAMS Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 1460 days indicates a long-term need for these engineering services. 3. Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. has a significant presence in government contracting, particularly within the defense sector. 4. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can incentivize cost control while ensuring contractor profit. 5. The specific engineering services provided are crucial for maintaining and enhancing warfighter programs. 6. The award value of over $19.8 million reflects substantial investment in product support.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19.8 million for engineering services over four years appears reasonable given the scope of supporting warfighter programs. Benchmarking against similar long-term, complex engineering support contracts within the Department of Defense would provide a more precise value assessment. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure aims to balance cost efficiency with contractor performance, but requires careful oversight to ensure value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of three bidders (no=3) suggests a healthy level of competition for this engineering services requirement. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive more favorable pricing and innovative solutions for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best possible price and quality for essential warfighter program support, reducing the risk of overpayment.

Public Impact

Directly benefits warfighter programs by ensuring the availability and effectiveness of critical products. Supports the Department of the Navy's mission readiness and technological superiority. The services provided likely involve technical expertise, system integration, and lifecycle management. Potential positive impact on the defense industry workforce through employment of engineers and technical specialists.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
Long-term contracts may reduce flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing technological needs.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical product support could pose a risk if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process.
Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. is a well-established contractor with a proven track record in defense.
The contract duration suggests a stable, long-term commitment to supporting vital warfighter programs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a critical component of the defense industrial base. The market for defense engineering services is substantial, driven by the continuous need for modernization, maintenance, and support of complex military systems. Booz Allen Hamilton is a major player in this space, competing with other large defense contractors for similar long-term support agreements.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate a small business set-aside. While Booz Allen Hamilton is a large business, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors, contributing to the overall ecosystem of defense support services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract would typically involve the Department of the Navy's contracting officers and program managers. They are responsible for monitoring performance, costs, and adherence to contract terms. Transparency is usually maintained through regular reporting requirements from the contractor and potential audits by government agencies or the Inspector General.

Related Government Programs

Defense Engineering Services
Warfighter Support Programs
Department of the Navy Contracts
Lifecycle Product Support

Risk Flags

Contract Type Risk (CPFF)
Long-Term Dependency
Performance Monitoring

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.8 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. ON DEMAND LIFE CYCLE PRODUCT SUPPORT FOR WARFIGHTER PROGRAMS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-30. End: 2013-07-29.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton Inc.'s track record with similar Department of Defense contracts?

Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. has an extensive history of securing and performing on large-scale contracts with the Department of Defense across various branches and agencies. They specialize in a wide range of services including engineering, IT, management consulting, and cybersecurity. Their track record often includes complex, long-term engagements similar to this one, focusing on providing technical expertise and strategic support for defense programs. While generally considered a reliable contractor, like any large firm, they have experienced scrutiny on specific contracts regarding performance or cost management. A detailed review of their past performance ratings and any significant contract disputes or awards would offer a more granular understanding of their capabilities and reliability in the context of warfighter program support.

How does the $19.8 million award value compare to similar engineering support contracts for warfighter programs?

The $19.8 million award value for a four-year contract (1460 days) for 'ON DEMAND LIFE CYCLE PRODUCT SUPPORT FOR WARFIGHTER PROGRAMS' appears to be within a reasonable range for complex defense engineering services. However, a precise comparison requires detailed analysis of the specific services rendered, the level of technical expertise required, and the scope of warfighter programs supported. Contracts for similar lifecycle product support, system integration, and sustainment engineering for major defense platforms can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars over their duration. Factors such as the maturity of the warfighter program, the criticality of the support, and the competitive landscape influence pricing. Without specific details on the deliverables and the number of comparable contracts, it's challenging to definitively benchmark this value, but it suggests a significant, long-term commitment to a specific set of warfighter needs.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for this type of service?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for engineering services like lifecycle product support revolve around cost control and contractor incentive. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with a defined profit margin, the 'cost plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred. If cost estimation is inaccurate or if unforeseen issues drive up expenses, the total contract cost can exceed initial projections. The risk for the government is paying higher-than-expected costs, while the contractor is incentivized to manage costs to protect their fixed fee. Effective oversight, rigorous cost tracking, and clear definition of allowable costs are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the government receives good value. The CPFF structure can also sometimes lead to less aggressive cost-cutting by the contractor compared to fixed-price contracts.

How effective is 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for taxpayer money in defense engineering contracts?

Full and open competition is widely considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money in defense engineering contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices, encourages innovation, and increases the likelihood of selecting the best-qualified contractor at a fair market price. The presence of multiple bidders, as indicated by the three proposals received for this contract, suggests that the competition was meaningful. This process reduces the risk of contractors overcharging or providing substandard services, as they must vie for the contract based on both technical merit and cost. While oversight is still necessary, the initial competitive award sets a strong foundation for achieving cost-effective outcomes for the government and, by extension, the taxpayers.

What are the historical spending patterns for 'Engineering Services' within the Department of the Navy?

The Department of the Navy consistently allocates substantial funding towards engineering services, reflecting the complexity and ongoing needs of its vast array of platforms and systems, including naval vessels, aircraft, and shore infrastructure. Historical spending data reveals a significant and often increasing trend in this category, driven by modernization efforts, maintenance requirements, research and development, and lifecycle support for aging assets. Engineering services encompass a broad spectrum, from basic design and analysis to advanced systems integration and sustainment. The Navy's budget typically includes line items specifically for engineering and technical services, often awarded through competitive processes to both large defense contractors and specialized firms. Analyzing specific historical spending figures for NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services) within the Navy would provide quantitative context to this general trend.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002409R3017

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

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

Address: BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC, MC LEAN, VA, 22102

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,859,244

Exercised Options: $20,859,244

Current Obligation: $19,813,613

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4024

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline