Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $21.4M for Defense Threat Reduction Agency's systems test support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,383,355 ($21.4M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-11-27

End Date: 2025-11-26

Contract Duration: 2,191 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: SOLUTION ENG.&SYSTEMS TEST SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: FORT BELVOIR, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22060

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $21.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: SOLUTION ENG.&SYSTEMS TEST SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in critical defense capabilities. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding process for this service. 3. Performance risk is moderate, given the complexity of systems integration and testing. 4. This contract supports essential operational readiness for national security missions. 5. The IT services sector sees substantial government spending on specialized support. 6. Contract type indicates a focus on managing costs while achieving specific outcomes.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's value of $21.4 million for systems engineering and test support appears reasonable for a multi-year engagement with a major defense contractor. Benchmarking against similar IT support contracts within the Department of Defense suggests that pricing is within expected ranges, though specific cost-plus-fixed-fee details would require deeper analysis. The duration of the contract (nearly 6 years) also indicates a substantial scope of work, justifying the overall investment.

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 3 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this type of specialized defense support service. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces. It provides assurance that the selected contractor offers the best value, not just the lowest price, for essential defense services.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense benefits from enhanced system readiness and effectiveness. Services delivered include crucial engineering, integration, and testing support for defense systems. The primary geographic impact is within the Defense Threat Reduction Agency's operational sphere. Workforce implications include specialized roles for engineers, testers, and technical analysts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts if not closely managed.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical systems support could pose long-term dependency risks.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive process.
Long contract duration suggests a stable and predictable need for these services.
Contractor (Booz Allen Hamilton) has a strong track record in government contracting.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader IT services sector, specifically focusing on computer systems design and related services. The defense IT market is a significant segment, characterized by complex requirements, high security needs, and substantial government investment. Comparable spending benchmarks in this area often involve multi-million dollar contracts for specialized engineering, testing, and integration support, reflecting the critical nature of defense systems.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration for this specific award (ss: false, sb: false). While Booz Allen Hamilton is a large prime contractor, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors. The extent of small business subcontracting will depend on the prime contractor's strategy and the specific needs of the project, which could impact the broader small business ecosystem within this defense IT sub-sector.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Accountability measures are embedded within the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure, requiring detailed cost reporting and justification. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance metrics and detailed cost breakdowns are typically internal.

Related Government Programs

Defense IT Modernization Programs
Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) Contracts
DoD Information Technology Services
Test and Evaluation Support Services

Risk Flags

Cost Overrun Potential (CPFF)
Performance Dependency
Scope Definition Clarity

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $21.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. SOLUTION ENG.&SYSTEMS TEST SUPPORT

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 (Defense Threat Reduction Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $21.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-11-27. End: 2025-11-26.

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

Booz Allen Hamilton has an extensive and well-documented track record with the Department of Defense, holding numerous contracts across various agencies and service areas. They are a major incumbent contractor for a wide range of services including IT modernization, cybersecurity, systems engineering, and strategic consulting. Their history includes both large prime contracts and significant subcontracting roles. While generally considered a reliable performer, like any large contractor, they have faced scrutiny on specific contracts regarding cost management and performance, which is typical for the scale and complexity of their work. Their long-standing presence indicates a deep understanding of DoD requirements and processes.

How does the pricing structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) compare to other contract types for similar services?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts are common for research and development, complex services, or situations where the scope is not fully defined at the outset, allowing for flexibility. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, CPFF offers less cost certainty for the government but can be more appropriate when innovation or adaptation is key. FFP provides greater cost predictability but can stifle flexibility. Other types like Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) or Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) introduce performance-based incentives. For systems engineering and test support, CPFF is often chosen to balance the need for specialized expertise and evolving technical requirements with contractor motivation, though it necessitates robust government oversight to control costs.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract and how are they being mitigated?

Primary risks include potential cost overruns due to the CPFF structure, scope creep if requirements are not well-defined, and performance issues if the contractor fails to deliver adequate technical expertise or timely support. Mitigation strategies typically involve strong government oversight by the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), detailed performance work statements (PWS), regular progress reviews, and robust financial tracking. The fixed fee component incentivizes the contractor to manage costs within the estimated ceiling. Furthermore, the full and open competition process aims to select a contractor with a proven ability to manage such risks effectively.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar systems engineering and test support services within the Defense Threat Reduction Agency?

Historical spending patterns for systems engineering and test support within the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) generally show consistent investment in these critical areas. DTRA, by its nature, requires specialized technical expertise to manage and assess complex threats and systems. Spending on such services often fluctuates based on specific program needs, modernization efforts, and evolving threat landscapes. While precise historical figures for this exact service category require detailed database queries, it's typical for agencies like DTRA to allocate significant portions of their budget to technical support contracts, often in the multi-million dollar range annually, to ensure operational effectiveness and maintain technological superiority.

How does the number of bidders (3) impact the value received by the government?

Having three bidders in a full and open competition generally indicates a reasonably competitive environment. While more bidders can sometimes lead to even lower prices, three is often considered a sufficient number to foster meaningful price discovery and ensure that the government is not limited to a single or duopoly offering. This level of competition suggests that multiple firms possess the capability and interest to perform the work, increasing the likelihood that the government will receive a competitive offer that balances cost and technical merit. It reduces the risk of a non-competitive outcome compared to situations with only one or two bidders.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: HDTRA118R0045

Offers Received: 3

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: $43,560,995

Exercised Options: $43,560,995

Current Obligation: $21,383,355

Actual Outlays: $946,443

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 9

Total Subaward Amount: $2,090,550

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HDTRA119D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline