Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $11.7M for Missile Defense Agency support, highlighting engineering services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,729,167 ($11.7M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-05-07

End Date: 2011-07-31

Contract Duration: 2,641 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200408!000332!9700!HQ0006!MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0025K !C!N! !N!HQ000604F0015! !20040507!20050509!006928857!006928857!006928857!N!BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !MC LEAN !VA!22102!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000000600000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !CAA !MDA SUPPORT !541710!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Y!C!N!N! ! ! ! ! ! !00 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.7 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: 200408!000332!9700!HQ0006!MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0025K !C!N! !N!HQ000604F0015! !20040507!20050509!006928857!006928857!006928857!N!BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !MC LEAN !VA!22102!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLI… Key points: 1. Contract value of $11.7M for engineering services indicates significant investment in specialized expertise. 2. The 'full and open competition' suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. A contract duration of over 2600 days points to a long-term need for these services. 4. The Missile Defense Agency's reliance on external contractors for systems engineering underscores the complexity of its mission. 5. The firm fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor, incentivizing efficient delivery. 6. This award falls within the engineering services sector, a critical area for defense technology development.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $11.7 million for engineering services appears reasonable given the long duration and the specialized nature of supporting the Missile Defense Agency. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for defense agencies suggests this award is within expected parameters. The firm fixed-price structure further indicates a commitment to achieving defined outcomes within a set budget, which is generally a positive sign for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This approach typically fosters a competitive environment, encouraging multiple bidders to offer their best pricing and technical solutions. The presence of multiple bidders, while not explicitly detailed here, is implied by the competition type and is crucial for ensuring fair market price discovery and preventing cost overruns.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through competitive bidding and ensures that the government receives the most advantageous offer.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Missile Defense Agency, which receives critical systems engineering support to advance its complex mission. Services delivered include specialized engineering expertise essential for the development, integration, and sustainment of missile defense systems. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the contractor's facilities and the agency's operational centers, primarily in Virginia. Workforce implications include the employment of highly skilled engineers and technical professionals by Booz Allen Hamilton.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in long-term engineering contracts if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single large contractor for critical systems engineering could pose a long-term dependency risk.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive award process, likely resulting in favorable pricing.
The long duration indicates a stable, ongoing need for these specialized engineering services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a vital component of the defense industrial base. The market for defense engineering services is characterized by high barriers to entry due to specialized knowledge requirements and security clearances. Spending in this sector is driven by national security priorities, particularly in areas like missile defense, which require continuous innovation and complex system integration. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by the Department of Defense to prime contractors.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates this contract was not a small business set-aside (ss=false, sb=false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically mandated for small businesses through this award. However, large prime contractors like Booz Allen Hamilton often engage small businesses for specialized support services, so indirect subcontracting opportunities may exist.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Missile Defense Agency's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specific services. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics may not always be publicly disclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA)
Department of Defense IT and Engineering Services
Aerospace and Defense Contracting

Risk Flags

Long-term contract duration may increase risk of scope creep or changing requirements.
Sole reliance on a single contractor for critical systems engineering could pose a dependency risk.
Firm Fixed Price contracts can be challenging to manage if initial scope definition is inadequate.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.7 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. 200408!000332!9700!HQ0006!MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY !GS23F0025K !C!N! !N!HQ000604F0015! !20040507!20050509!006928857!006928857!006928857!N!BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC !MC LEAN !VA!22102!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000000600000!N!N!000000000000!R414!SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !CAA !MDA SUPPORT !541710!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !999

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 $11.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-05-07. End: 2011-07-31.

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

Booz Allen Hamilton has a long-standing and extensive track record of providing a wide range of services to the Department of Defense, including the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). Their expertise spans systems engineering, cybersecurity, data analytics, and program management. For the MDA specifically, they have historically supported various programs related to missile defense system development, integration, and testing. Their performance on similar large-scale, complex defense contracts is generally considered robust, though like any large contractor, specific contract performance can vary. Publicly available data and past performance reviews, often part of the federal procurement process, would offer more granular detail on their specific performance metrics for this and related contracts.

How does the $11.7 million award compare to other engineering services contracts for the MDA?

The $11.7 million award for systems engineering services is a significant but not exceptionally large sum within the context of the Missile Defense Agency's overall budget and contracting activities. The MDA manages numerous complex programs that often involve multi-billion dollar investments over their lifecycles. Contracts for specialized engineering support, systems integration, and research and development can range from millions to hundreds of millions of dollars. This particular award, with a duration of over 2600 days (approximately 7 years), suggests a steady, long-term need for specific expertise rather than a massive, short-term project. When compared to other large prime contracts for missile defense system development or sustainment, this award appears to be for a focused engineering support function.

What are the primary risks associated with this type of long-term engineering support contract?

Key risks for this type of long-term engineering support contract include potential cost overruns if the scope of work is not precisely defined and managed, contractor performance issues leading to schedule delays or subpar technical solutions, and technological obsolescence if the systems being supported evolve rapidly. For the government, there's also the risk of contractor lock-in, where reliance on a single provider for critical expertise can reduce future flexibility and bargaining power. Furthermore, changes in agency priorities or budget constraints could necessitate contract modifications or termination, leading to disruption. The firm fixed-price nature mitigates some cost risks for the government but places more risk on the contractor for performance and efficiency.

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

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in defense engineering contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to compete, it fosters a dynamic environment where contractors are incentivized to offer their most competitive pricing and innovative technical solutions to win the award. This broad competition helps establish a realistic market price and reduces the likelihood of paying inflated costs. While it requires more effort in terms of proposal preparation and evaluation, the potential savings and the assurance of receiving the best overall value (considering both price and technical merit) make it a preferred approach for significant government procurements like this one.

What is the historical spending trend for engineering services by the Missile Defense Agency?

Historical spending by the Missile Defense Agency on engineering services has been substantial and consistent, reflecting the ongoing complexity and critical nature of its mission. The MDA consistently procures engineering, research, development, and technical support services to design, build, test, and sustain its various missile defense capabilities. Annual spending in this category often runs into the billions of dollars, distributed across numerous contracts with various large and specialized defense contractors. Factors influencing this spending include evolving threat landscapes, technological advancements, program maturation, and congressional appropriations. While specific year-over-year trends fluctuate based on program needs and budget cycles, a sustained high level of investment in engineering expertise remains a hallmark of MDA's operational strategy.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation

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: $1,041,736

Exercised Options: $207,834

Current Obligation: $11,729,167

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F0025K

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline