Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $24.5M for Missile Defense Agency engineering services under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,570,703 ($24.6M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-08-18

End Date: 2011-06-30

Contract Duration: 2,873 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200312!000587!9700!ZD60 !MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0025K !C!N! !N!HQ000603F0019 !20030818!20040819!006928857!006928857!006928857!N!BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !MC LEAN !VA!22102!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000000400000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1CAA!BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYS !541710!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Y!C!N!N! ! ! ! ! ! !* ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22201

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.6 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: 200312!000587!9700!ZD60 !MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0025K !C!N! !N!HQ000603F0019 !20030818!20040819!006928857!006928857!006928857!N!BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !MC LEAN !VA!22102!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLIN… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for critical systems engineering support to the Missile Defense Agency. 2. The contract was competed on a full and open basis, suggesting broad market participation. 3. A firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor bears the primary risk for cost overruns. 4. The duration of the contract is substantial, spanning over 8 years. 5. The services fall under engineering, a sector with significant government spending. 6. The contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, is a well-established entity in government contracting.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The awarded amount of $24.5 million for systems engineering services appears reasonable given the contract's duration of over 8 years and the specialized nature of missile defense. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for defense agencies suggests that this pricing is within expected ranges. The firm-fixed-price structure further supports value by incentivizing contractor efficiency. Without specific per-unit cost data, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the overall award seems to align with market expectations for complex defense systems support.

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 bids. The specific number of bidders is not provided in the data, but the 'full and open' designation generally implies a competitive process designed to solicit the widest possible range of offers. This approach is intended to foster price discovery and ensure the government receives competitive pricing by leveraging the capabilities of multiple potential contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it typically drives down costs through competitive bidding, ensuring that government funds are used efficiently and effectively.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. military and national security, through enhanced missile defense capabilities. Services delivered include critical systems engineering and technical assistance for ballistic missile defense systems. The geographic impact is national, supporting a key defense agency's mission. Workforce implications include the employment of highly skilled engineers and technical professionals.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep given the long contract duration and complex engineering services.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical systems engineering could pose a risk if performance falters.
The specialized nature of missile defense may limit the pool of truly competitive bidders in future procurements.

Positive Signals

Award to a well-established contractor with a proven track record in defense systems.
Firm-fixed-price contract type aligns incentives for cost control.
Full and open competition suggests a robust initial bidding process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a significant segment of federal spending, particularly within the Department of Defense. The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) operates in a highly specialized niche focused on developing and deploying advanced missile defense technologies. Spending in this area is driven by national security imperatives and technological advancements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other large-scale systems engineering and integration contracts awarded to major defense contractors for complex weapon systems.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not specify any small business set-aside provisions (ss=false, sb=false). Therefore, it is unlikely that small businesses were specifically targeted for this prime contract. However, the prime contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, may engage small businesses for subcontracting opportunities to fulfill specific technical requirements or to meet broader socioeconomic goals, though this is not explicitly detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Missile Defense Agency and the Department of Defense. As a firm-fixed-price contract, performance monitoring and acceptance of deliverables are key oversight mechanisms. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. The Inspector General of the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Ballistic Missile Defense Program
Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA)
Department of Defense IT and Engineering Services

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of scope misalignment with evolving technology.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical systems engineering.
Potential for cost increases through change orders if scope is not tightly managed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.6 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. 200312!000587!9700!ZD60 !MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0025K !C!N! !N!HQ000603F0019 !20030818!20040819!006928857!006928857!006928857!N!BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !MC LEAN !VA!22102!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000000400000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1CAA!BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYS !541710!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

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 (Missile Defense Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-08-18. End: 2011-06-30.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with the Missile Defense Agency and similar defense contracts?

Booz Allen Hamilton is a major government contractor with extensive experience supporting defense agencies, including the Missile Defense Agency. They have a long history of providing systems engineering, integration, and technical support for complex defense programs. Their track record typically involves large, multi-year contracts requiring deep technical expertise. While specific performance metrics for this particular contract are not detailed, Booz Allen Hamilton is generally considered a reliable performer in the defense sector, though like any large contractor, they may have faced past performance reviews or challenges on specific projects. Their extensive portfolio suggests a capacity to manage complex, high-value contracts.

How does the $24.5 million award compare to other systems engineering contracts for the MDA?

The $24.5 million award for over 8 years of service represents an average annual value of approximately $3 million. This figure appears to be on the lower end for major systems engineering support contracts within the Missile Defense Agency, which often involve much larger sums, sometimes hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, for comprehensive program support. However, the scope of 'Systems Engineering Services' can vary significantly. This specific award might represent a focused support effort or a component of a larger program. Without more granular data on the specific tasks and deliverables, a direct comparison is difficult, but it suggests this may not be the largest single engineering contract awarded by the MDA.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the government?

The primary risks for the government associated with this contract include potential contractor underperformance, where Booz Allen Hamilton might fail to deliver the required systems engineering expertise, impacting the effectiveness of missile defense systems. Given the firm-fixed-price nature, there's a risk of the contractor cutting corners to maintain profitability, potentially affecting quality. Another risk is vendor lock-in, where the deep integration and specialized knowledge gained by Booz Allen Hamilton over the contract's long duration could make it difficult and costly to transition to another contractor in the future. Finally, the long duration itself presents a risk of evolving technological requirements that the initial contract scope may not adequately address without costly modifications.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type in managing costs for complex engineering services like these?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for managing costs when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks are understood. For complex engineering services, FFP places the primary cost risk on the contractor, incentivizing them to control expenses and improve efficiency to maximize profit. This can lead to cost savings for the government compared to cost-reimbursement contracts. However, if the scope is not perfectly defined upfront, FFP can lead to change orders or disputes, potentially increasing costs. In the context of missile defense systems engineering, where requirements can evolve, the government must ensure robust scope management to realize the full cost benefits of FFP.

What are the historical spending patterns for systems engineering services at the Missile Defense Agency?

Historical spending patterns for systems engineering services at the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) are substantial, reflecting the complexity and criticality of its mission. The MDA consistently procures significant amounts of engineering, integration, and technical support to develop and maintain its multi-layered missile defense capabilities. Spending in this category often runs into the billions of dollars annually across various contracts. These services are crucial for managing the intricate development lifecycle of advanced weapon systems, ensuring interoperability, and addressing evolving threats. The agency relies heavily on large, experienced defense contractors to fulfill these needs, making systems engineering a core component of its overall budget.

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: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

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, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,978,023

Exercised Options: $24,097,288

Current Obligation: $24,570,703

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0025K

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline