Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $67.4M for DCGS-A tactical intelligence support, a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $67,431,730 ($67.4M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-09-25

End Date: 2017-10-20

Contract Duration: 756 days

Daily Burn Rate: $89.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF THIS PERFORMANCE-BASED TASK ORDER, W15P7T-10-D-D415-KY09, ENTITLED "SUPPORT AND MANAGEMENT FOR DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEM ARMY (DCGS-A) TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE DEPLOYMENT (TID)," IS ISSUED ON A COST-PLUS-FIXED-FEE (CPFF) BASIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT W15P7T-10-D-D415 AND MODIFICATIONS THERETO. THE R23G ORDER NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THIS TASK IS R23G-0842.

Place of Performance

Location: ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, HARFORD County, MARYLAND, 21005

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $67.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF THIS PERFORMANCE-BASED TASK ORDER, W15P7T-10-D-D415-KY09, ENTITLED "SUPPORT AND MANAGEMENT FOR DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEM ARMY (DCGS-A) TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE DEPLOYMENT (TID)," IS ISSUED ON A COST-PLUS-FIXED-FEE (CPFF) BASIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CON… Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a cost-plus-fixed-fee basis, which can lead to higher costs if not managed closely. 2. Performance-based task order indicates a focus on achieving specific outcomes rather than just inputs. 3. The contract supports the Distributed Common Ground System Army (DCGS-A), a critical intelligence platform. 4. Duration of 756 days suggests a significant, ongoing need for these services. 5. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, implying a robust bidding process. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to engineering services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

This contract is a cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) award, which carries inherent risks of cost overruns if not meticulously managed. While CPFF contracts can be suitable for research and development or when the scope is not fully defined, they generally offer less price certainty than fixed-price contracts. Benchmarking the value is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and comparison to similar CPFF contracts for intelligence system support. The fixed fee component provides some cost control, but the variable cost component requires close oversight to ensure efficiency and prevent waste.

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 had the opportunity to submit proposals. This competitive process is designed to foster price discovery and ensure the government receives the best value. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a healthy level of market interest and a potentially competitive pricing environment.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces and encouraging innovative solutions from a wider pool of contractors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel who rely on the DCGS-A system for tactical intelligence. Services delivered include support and management for the deployment of the DCGS-A tactical intelligence system. The geographic impact is likely focused on Army operational areas where DCGS-A is deployed. Workforce implications include the need for skilled personnel in intelligence analysis, system management, and engineering.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure can lead to cost overruns if not tightly managed.
Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess efficiency.
The critical nature of intelligence systems means any performance lapse could have significant operational consequences.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting potential for competitive pricing.
Performance-based task order implies a focus on achieving defined outcomes.
Supports a critical military intelligence system (DCGS-A), indicating strategic importance.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense intelligence systems. The market for defense IT and intelligence support services is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to maintaining and enhancing these capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar intelligence system support, maintenance, and deployment services across various military branches and defense agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb fields) was not a specific set-aside for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside requirement. However, the prime contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which would contribute to the broader small business economy.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). As a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, rigorous financial oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures against the estimated cost and ensure the fixed fee is earned appropriately. Transparency is facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms, and the Inspector General for the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations into fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Distributed Common Ground System Army (DCGS-A)
Tactical Intelligence Systems
Defense Intelligence Support Services
Army IT Modernization Programs

Risk Flags

Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
Performance metrics not detailed in provided data, making objective assessment difficult.
Critical intelligence system support requires high reliability; any lapse is a significant risk.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $67.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. IGF::OT::IGF THIS PERFORMANCE-BASED TASK ORDER, W15P7T-10-D-D415-KY09, ENTITLED "SUPPORT AND MANAGEMENT FOR DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEM ARMY (DCGS-A) TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE DEPLOYMENT (TID)," IS ISSUED ON A COST-PLUS-FIXED-FEE (CPFF) BASIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT W15P7T-10-D-D415 AND MODIFICATIONS THERETO. THE R23G ORDER NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THIS TASK IS R23G-0842.

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 (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $67.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-09-25. End: 2017-10-20.

What is the historical spending trend for DCGS-A support contracts awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton?

Analyzing historical spending for DCGS-A support contracts awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton requires access to comprehensive federal procurement databases. While this specific task order represents $67.4 million over approximately two years (September 2015 to October 2017), understanding the broader trend involves examining prior and subsequent contracts. Booz Allen Hamilton is a major defense contractor with a long history of supporting intelligence systems. Their overall contract portfolio with the Department of Defense is extensive. To assess trends, one would look at the total value of DCGS-A related contracts awarded to them over time, the types of contract vehicles used (e.g., CPFF, FFP), and the duration and scope of these awards. Significant year-over-year increases or decreases could indicate shifts in program priorities, technological advancements, or changes in contractor performance and competition.

How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) structure of this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar intelligence support services?

The Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) structure is common for complex, evolving projects where the final scope or cost is difficult to define precisely at the outset, such as advanced R&D or system integration. For intelligence support services like those for DCGS-A, CPFF allows flexibility. However, it shifts cost risk to the government, as the contractor is reimbursed for actual costs plus a predetermined fixed fee. Industry benchmarks for CPFF contracts often focus on the ratio of the fixed fee to the total estimated cost, and the overall cost growth experienced. A 'good' CPFF contract typically sees costs staying within a reasonable percentage of the initial estimate, and the fixed fee representing a fair profit margin without being excessive. Without specific cost data and comparison points for similar DCGS-A support tasks, it's difficult to definitively benchmark this contract's CPFF structure. However, the inherent risk of cost escalation in CPFF necessitates stringent oversight.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) associated with this task order, and how was performance measured?

The provided data identifies this as a 'performance-based task order,' which implies that specific performance standards and metrics should be defined within the contract. However, the raw data does not detail these Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or the precise methodology for performance measurement. Typically, for intelligence system support, KPIs might include system uptime, response times for technical support, successful deployment rates, accuracy of data processing, or adherence to security protocols. Performance would likely be assessed through regular progress reports, technical reviews, and potentially user feedback. The 'performance-based' nature suggests that contractor payment or award fees could be tied to achieving these predefined metrics, aiming to incentivize efficient and effective service delivery.

What is the potential impact of this contract on the development and deployment of future tactical intelligence capabilities for the Army?

This contract, supporting the Distributed Common Ground System Army (DCGS-A) Tactical Intelligence Deployment (TID), directly influences the Army's current tactical intelligence capabilities. The services provided likely involve maintaining, upgrading, and ensuring the operational readiness of a critical intelligence platform. The success and lessons learned from this contract can inform future investments in intelligence technology and strategy. If the support provided enhances the effectiveness and efficiency of DCGS-A, it validates the current approach and may lead to continued reliance on similar systems or service models. Conversely, challenges encountered could prompt re-evaluation of system architecture, acquisition strategies, or contractor selection processes for future intelligence capabilities.

How does the $67.4 million award compare to the total lifecycle cost or annual budget for the DCGS-A program?

The $67.4 million award for this specific task order represents a portion of the overall investment in the Distributed Common Ground System Army (DCGS-A). DCGS-A is a complex and long-standing program, and its total lifecycle cost or annual budget is significantly higher than this single task order. Programs like DCGS-A involve substantial expenditures on development, procurement, sustainment, training, and personnel over many years. This task order, covering support and management for tactical intelligence deployment over approximately two years (756 days), likely addresses a specific operational need within the broader DCGS-A ecosystem. To contextualize this award, one would need to compare it against the total program budget allocated for DCGS-A sustainment, modernization, or specific deployment phases in fiscal years 2015-2017.

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: $92,980,161

Exercised Options: $92,980,161

Current Obligation: $67,431,730

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 1

Total Subaward Amount: $1,000,000

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W15P7T10DD415

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline