Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $60.4M engineering services contract by GSA, spanning over a year

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $60,385,387 ($60.4M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2015-07-09

End Date: 2016-09-08

Contract Duration: 427 days

Daily Burn Rate: $141.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: MC LEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $60.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract value of $60.4M represents a significant investment in engineering services. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract are crucial for assessing value for money. 3. Risk indicators will be monitored based on contract type and performance history. 4. Performance context is essential to understand the effectiveness of engineering services delivered. 5. Sector positioning within engineering services highlights the demand for specialized expertise.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $60.4M for engineering services appears to be within a reasonable range for a contract of this duration and scope. Benchmarking against similar GSA contracts for engineering services would provide a more precise assessment of value for money. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure necessitates careful oversight to ensure costs remain controlled and the fixed fee is justified by the services rendered.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders likely had the opportunity to submit proposals. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and achieving competitive pricing. The number of bidders and the evaluation process would further clarify the extent of competition and its impact on the final award.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition suggests that taxpayers benefit from a process designed to solicit the best possible offers, potentially leading to cost savings and higher quality services.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring specialized engineering expertise are the primary beneficiaries. Services delivered likely encompass a range of engineering disciplines, supporting various government projects. Geographic impact is potentially nationwide, depending on the specific projects undertaken. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled engineers and technical staff by the contractor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns in cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts if not managed diligently.
Ensuring the fixed fee accurately reflects the complexity and risk of the engineering services.
Monitoring contractor performance to ensure adherence to project timelines and quality standards.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
Contractor's established presence in government contracting indicates experience and capability.
Clear contract duration provides a defined period for service delivery and performance evaluation.

Sector Analysis

The engineering services sector is a critical component of government contracting, supporting infrastructure development, research, and operational needs across various agencies. This contract, valued at $60.4M, fits within the broader market for professional engineering services, which is characterized by specialized expertise and project-based work. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar engineering services contracts within the federal government would provide further context on the scale and pricing of this award.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Analysis of the contractor's past performance and subcontracting plans would be necessary to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), likely through contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms of the cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, performance metrics, and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and reporting, though specific project details may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

GSA Federal Acquisition Service Contracts
Engineering and Technical Services
Professional Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
Contract duration necessitates sustained monitoring for performance and budget adherence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $60.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. IGF::OT::IGF

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 $60.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-07-09. End: 2016-09-08.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with similar engineering services contracts awarded by the GSA?

Booz Allen Hamilton has a significant track record with the General Services Administration (GSA) and other federal agencies for providing a wide array of professional and technical services, including engineering. Their history often involves large-scale, complex projects. To assess their specific performance on similar engineering contracts, one would need to examine past contract awards, performance evaluations (such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any documented disputes or awards. A review of their portfolio would reveal their experience in managing budgets, meeting deadlines, and delivering quality engineering solutions within the federal landscape. Their extensive experience suggests a capacity to handle substantial contracts like the one detailed, but specific performance metrics are key to a thorough evaluation.

How does the $60.4M contract value compare to typical engineering services contracts awarded by GSA?

The $60.4 million contract value for engineering services awarded by the GSA to Booz Allen Hamilton is substantial, placing it in the upper tier of individual contract awards for this category. Typical engineering services contracts can range widely, from smaller, specialized task orders to multi-year, multi-million dollar Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) vehicles. Contracts in the tens of millions are common for significant federal projects requiring extensive engineering expertise. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze GSA's historical spending data for NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services) over the contract's performance period (2015-2016) and benchmark against contracts of similar duration and scope. However, a $60.4M award indicates a project of considerable scale and importance.

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

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this magnitude ($60.4M) revolve around cost control and ensuring value for the fixed fee. For the government, the risk is that the contractor's actual costs could significantly exceed initial estimates, even though the fee is fixed. This can lead to a higher overall price than anticipated if the 'cost' portion escalates. Diligent oversight by the contracting agency is crucial to scrutinize allowable costs and prevent inefficiencies. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating the costs required to perform the work, potentially making the fixed fee insufficient compensation. Effective risk mitigation requires robust cost accounting systems, detailed project management, and clear communication between the contractor and the government.

What does the 'Federal Acquisition Service' designation imply about the nature of these engineering services?

The designation 'Federal Acquisition Service' (FAS) within the General Services Administration (GSA) implies that this contract likely falls under GSA's purview for procuring common goods and services for other federal agencies. FAS is known for its role in providing centralized procurement solutions, including IT, telecommunications, and professional services. Therefore, these engineering services were likely procured by GSA on behalf of one or more other federal agencies that required specialized engineering expertise for their programs or projects. This approach leverages GSA's procurement expertise and contracting vehicles to achieve economies of scale and streamline the acquisition process for the end-user agencies.

How does the contract's duration (427 days) influence the assessment of its value and risk?

A contract duration of 427 days (approximately 14 months) for a $60.4 million engineering services contract suggests a project of significant scope and complexity that requires a substantial period for execution. This duration allows for in-depth planning, design, and implementation phases. From a value perspective, a longer duration can sometimes indicate a more comprehensive service offering or a phased approach to a large undertaking, potentially leading to better overall outcomes if managed effectively. However, it also increases the window for potential risks, such as scope creep, changes in requirements, or unforeseen technical challenges. For a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, a longer duration necessitates sustained oversight to ensure costs remain controlled throughout the project lifecycle and that the fixed fee remains appropriate for the effort expended.

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

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation

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: $84,231,038

Exercised Options: $84,231,038

Current Obligation: $60,385,387

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU108

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline