GSA's $29.7M financial process improvement contract awarded to TEKSOUTH CORPORATION shows mixed value and competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,733,169 ($29.7M)

Contractor: Teksouth Corporation

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2006-04-21

End Date: 2009-09-22

Contract Duration: 1,250 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.8K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: FINANCIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20330

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $29.7 million to TEKSOUTH CORPORATION for work described as: FINANCIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENT SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract's value proposition is unclear, with a high per-unit cost benchmark. 2. Competition was limited, raising concerns about price discovery and potential overpayment. 3. The contractor, TEKSOUTH CORPORATION, has a track record of performance on this contract. 4. The contract's duration and delivery order nature suggest flexibility but also potential for scope creep. 5. Spending is concentrated in the District of Columbia, indicating a specific geographic focus. 6. The contract type (Time and Materials) can lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $29.7 million over approximately 3.5 years suggests a significant investment in financial process improvement. However, without specific deliverables or performance metrics, assessing the true value-for-money is challenging. The contract's Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while offering flexibility, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if not rigorously monitored. Benchmarking against similar contracts for financial consulting services would be necessary to determine if the pricing is competitive.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that multiple vendors were considered. However, the specific number of bidders and the extent of the competition are not detailed. A limited competition could potentially lead to less favorable pricing for the government compared to a full and open competition, as the pool of potential offerors is restricted. Further details on the solicitation process would clarify the competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition may result in higher costs for taxpayers due to reduced price pressure on the contractor. It also limits the government's ability to leverage the broadest range of innovative solutions available in the market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies seeking to improve their financial processes and operational efficiency. Services delivered likely include financial management consulting, system implementation support, and process re-engineering. The geographic impact is concentrated in the District of Columbia, suggesting support for federal entities located there. Workforce implications may involve the deployment of specialized financial analysts and consultants, potentially augmenting agency staff.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing structure.
Limited competition may have resulted in suboptimal pricing.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Geographic concentration could limit broader agency access to services.

Positive Signals

Awarded through a competitive process, indicating some level of vendor vetting.
Contract duration suggests a sustained need for financial improvement services.
Contractor has experience performing under this award.

Sector Analysis

The financial consulting services sector is a significant part of the professional services market, supporting government and private sector entities in optimizing financial operations. This contract falls within the broader professional, scientific, and technical services category. Spending in this area often fluctuates with agency needs for modernization, efficiency drives, and compliance requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within the GSA's Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) schedules for management and financial consulting.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a small business set-aside. The prime contractor, TEKSOUTH CORPORATION, is likely a mid-to-large-sized business, and opportunities for small businesses would depend on their subcontracting plans, which are not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS). Mechanisms likely include contract officer representative (COR) oversight, regular performance reviews, and financial audits to ensure compliance with contract terms and efficient use of funds. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS-NG, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Financial Management Services
Management and Financial Consulting, Acquisition and Grants Management Support, and Business and Speciality Consulting Services
Professional Services

Risk Flags

Time and Materials Pricing
Limited Competition
Lack of Specific Performance Metrics
Geographic Concentration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $29.7 million to TEKSOUTH CORPORATION. FINANCIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TEKSOUTH CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-04-21. End: 2009-09-22.

What is the track record of TEKSOUTH CORPORATION on this specific contract?

TEKSOUTH CORPORATION was awarded this contract on April 21, 2006, and it concluded on September 22, 2009, spanning approximately 3 years and 5 months. During this period, the contract reached a total value of $29,733,168.76. The contract type was Time and Materials (T&M), which suggests the contractor was compensated based on the hours worked by their personnel and the cost of materials used. The number of delivery orders issued was 4, indicating that the work was likely broken down into distinct taskings. The fact that the contract reached its full value suggests consistent demand for the services provided and the contractor's ability to deliver within the scope and budget allocated across these orders. Without access to performance reports or specific task order details, a granular assessment of their performance quality, timeliness, and adherence to scope is limited, but the full utilization of the award value implies a level of sustained engagement and delivery.

How does the value of this contract compare to similar financial process improvement contracts?

Comparing the value of this $29.7 million contract requires context regarding the scope, duration, and specific services rendered. Financial process improvement can range from basic accounting system upgrades to complex enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementations or strategic financial management overhauls. This contract, awarded over approximately 3.5 years, suggests a substantial, ongoing engagement. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify comparable contracts awarded by GSA or other agencies for similar services (e.g., financial system modernization, audit support, process re-engineering) within a similar timeframe. Factors like the number of agencies supported, the complexity of the financial systems involved, and the level of expertise required (e.g., CPA-level services vs. general financial analysis) significantly influence contract value. Without such specific comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether $29.7 million represents a high, low, or average value for the services provided.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract?

The primary risks associated with this contract stem from its Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure and the limited competition. T&M contracts can pose a risk of cost escalation if not managed diligently, as the government pays for actual labor hours and material costs incurred by the contractor. This necessitates robust oversight to ensure efficient work practices and prevent scope creep. The limited competition, while not necessarily indicative of a sole-source situation, suggests a potentially smaller pool of bidders, which could reduce price pressure and potentially lead to less favorable terms for the government. Furthermore, the lack of detailed performance metrics in the award data makes it challenging to assess the contractor's performance risk. Finally, the concentration of work in the District of Columbia might pose a risk if the services were intended for broader national application, limiting accessibility for other geographic regions.

How effective was the competition for this contract in ensuring fair pricing?

The competition level for this contract is described as 'limited,' which generally implies that the solicitation was not fully and openly competed. While the specific number of bidders isn't provided, limited competition typically involves a restricted number of sources, potentially due to specific requirements, existing contracts, or other factors. This level of competition is less likely to drive prices down as effectively as a full and open competition where numerous vendors can vie for the contract. Therefore, while the contract was competed, the 'limited' nature suggests a moderate risk that the pricing achieved may not be as competitive as it could have been under a broader solicitation. The government relies on strong negotiation and oversight in limited competition scenarios to mitigate this risk and ensure fair pricing for taxpayers.

What does the contract's duration and award type imply about the nature of the services?

The contract was awarded on April 21, 2006, and expired on September 22, 2009, giving it a duration of approximately 3 years and 5 months. This extended period suggests that the financial process improvement services required were not a one-time fix but rather an ongoing need for support, analysis, or implementation. The award type was 'Delivery Order,' indicating that this contract likely served as a vehicle (potentially from a GSA Schedule or similar IDIQ contract) from which multiple task orders were issued. The 'Time and Materials' (T&M) pricing structure further implies that the exact scope or effort required might have been difficult to define precisely upfront, or that flexibility was needed to adapt to evolving requirements. T&M is often used when the level of effort is uncertain, allowing the government to pay for the actual time and resources consumed.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Accounting, Tax Preparation, Bookkeeping, and Payroll Services › Offices of Certified Public Accountants

Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: PT576001T1

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1420 NORTHBROOK DR # 220, GARDENDALE, AL, 35071

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $46,423,213

Exercised Options: $37,245,837

Current Obligation: $29,733,169

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0357P

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline