Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $66.4M contract for broad engineering and technical support services to the Navy

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $66,366,055 ($66.4M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-08-01

End Date: 2018-09-05

Contract Duration: 1,861 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY BEST COMMERCIAL PRACTICES TO ALL TASKS ACCOMPLISHED UNDER THE CONTRACT, INCLUDING ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT, QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT. THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT ENCOMPASSES STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL AIRBORNE; LAND-BASED; AND MOBILE, SEA-BASED SURFACE AND SUB-SURFACE, OR AND SPACE-BASED PLATFORMS, SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS OR AND COMPONENTS.

Place of Performance

Location: SAINT INIGOES, SAINT MARYS County, MARYLAND, 20684

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $66.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY BEST COMMERCIAL PRACTICES TO ALL TASKS ACCOMPLISHED UNDER THE CONTRACT, INCLUDING ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT, QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT. THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT ENCOMPASSES STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL AIRBORNE; LAND-BASED; … Key points: 1. Contract covers a wide range of platforms including airborne, land-based, sea-based, and space-based systems. 2. Services include engineering, technical support, quality management, and technical management. 3. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 4. This award represents a significant investment in specialized engineering and technical expertise for naval operations. 5. The duration of the contract is substantial, indicating a long-term need for these services. 6. The contractor is a well-established entity in the federal contracting space, particularly within defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $66.4 million over approximately five years for comprehensive engineering and technical support appears reasonable given the broad scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for the Department of Defense suggests this award falls within expected ranges. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure, while allowing for flexibility, requires careful monitoring to ensure costs remain controlled and aligned with the fixed fee.

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 a bid. This suggests a competitive environment where multiple companies vied for the opportunity. The presence of two bids (as indicated by 'no': 2) suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific award, which can contribute to price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to better pricing and a wider selection of qualified contractors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its operational readiness, receiving advanced engineering and technical support. Services delivered will enhance the performance, reliability, and lifecycle management of various naval platforms and systems. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, supporting naval operations and research facilities across the United States. Workforce implications include the potential for skilled engineering and technical jobs, both within the contractor's organization and potentially through subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
The broad scope may present challenges in precisely defining and controlling all aspects of performance.
Reliance on a single contractor for such a wide array of critical support could pose a risk if performance falters.

Positive Signals

Awarding to a large, experienced contractor like Booz Allen Hamilton suggests a high likelihood of successful performance.
Full and open competition indicates a structured procurement process aimed at achieving best value.
The contract's duration implies a stable, long-term need that the contractor is positioned to meet.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense applications. The market for defense engineering and technical support is substantial, driven by the continuous need for modernization, maintenance, and operational readiness of complex military systems. Booz Allen Hamilton is a major player in this sector, competing with other large defense contractors for similar high-value awards. Spending in this category is critical for maintaining technological superiority and ensuring mission effectiveness.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). While the primary awardee is a large business, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors, depending on the contractor's subcontracting plan and the specific tasks involved. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether Booz Allen Hamilton actively seeks out and utilizes small business partners for specialized services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Navy contracting officers and program managers. They are responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and managing payments. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Contracts
Defense Engineering Services Contracts
Aerospace Engineering Support
Platform Systems Engineering
Technical Support Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns in CPFF structure
Complexity of managing diverse platform support
Moderate competition level (2 offers)

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $66.4 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY BEST COMMERCIAL PRACTICES TO ALL TASKS ACCOMPLISHED UNDER THE CONTRACT, INCLUDING ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT, QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT SUPPORT. THE SCOPE OF THE CONTRACT ENCOMPASSES STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL AIRBORNE; LAND-BASED; AND MOBILE, SEA-BASED SURFACE AND SUB-SURFACE, OR AND SPACE-BASED PLATFORMS, SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS OR AND COMPONENTS.

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 Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $66.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-08-01. End: 2018-09-05.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with similar large-scale engineering support contracts for the Department of Defense?

Booz Allen Hamilton has a long and extensive history of securing and performing large-scale engineering and technical support contracts with the Department of Defense and its various branches, including the Navy. They are a prime contractor on numerous complex programs requiring expertise across a wide spectrum of defense technologies and platforms. Their track record generally indicates a capacity to manage significant budgets, deliver complex solutions, and meet stringent performance requirements. However, like any large contractor, they have also faced scrutiny and occasional performance issues on specific contracts, which are typically addressed through contract management and performance improvement plans. Their consistent presence in winning major defense contracts suggests a strong understanding of government procurement processes and a robust capability to meet defense needs.

How does the $66.4 million value compare to other similar engineering support contracts awarded by the Navy in the last five years?

The $66.4 million contract value for Booz Allen Hamilton is a substantial award, but it falls within a common range for large, comprehensive engineering and technical support contracts issued by the Department of the Navy. The Navy frequently awards multi-year contracts in the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars for services that encompass broad system engineering, lifecycle support, and advanced technical expertise. For instance, contracts for ship design, combat systems integration, or major platform modernization often exceed this value. This specific award's size is commensurate with the described scope, which covers strategic and tactical airborne, land-based, sea-based, and space-based platforms. Benchmarking against similar awards indicates that this contract is significant but not exceptionally large relative to the Navy's overall spending on complex engineering services.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this magnitude and scope?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract of this magnitude and scope revolve around cost control and contractor incentive. For the government, the risk is that the contractor may incur higher costs than anticipated, even though the fee is fixed. This can occur if the contractor is less motivated to control costs due to the assurance of cost reimbursement. Scope creep is another significant risk; with a broad scope encompassing diverse platforms and services, there's a potential for tasks to expand beyond initial expectations, leading to increased costs and potential disputes. For the contractor, the risk lies in accurately estimating the costs to perform the work and ensuring the fixed fee adequately compensates them for the effort and risk undertaken. Inadequate cost estimation or unforeseen technical challenges could erode their profit margin. Effective government oversight and robust change management processes are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the '2' in the 'number of offers' field signify for the government and taxpayers?

The '2' in the 'number of offers' field indicates that two bids were received in response to this solicitation. For the government, receiving multiple offers is generally positive as it suggests a competitive process. However, with only two offers, the level of competition is considered moderate rather than robust. This means the government had a choice between two qualified bidders, which likely helped in price discovery and negotiation compared to a sole-source award. For taxpayers, moderate competition can lead to reasonable pricing, but a higher number of bids (e.g., 3-5 or more) often correlates with more aggressive pricing and potentially better value. The government must ensure that the evaluation process for these two offers was thorough and objective to confirm that the selected contractor indeed offered the best value considering both technical merit and price.

How does the broad scope of services (airborne, land-based, sea-based, space-based) impact the contract's manageability and oversight?

The broad scope of services, encompassing airborne, land-based, sea-based, and space-based platforms, significantly increases the complexity of contract manageability and oversight. It requires the contracting agency to possess or develop expertise across multiple domains and technologies. Oversight must be multi-faceted, with dedicated teams or personnel focusing on each platform type and service area. Ensuring consistent application of 'best commercial practices' across such diverse operations is challenging. Potential risks include fragmented oversight, difficulty in integrating services across different domains, and the possibility of performance gaps in less-understood areas. The contractor must also maintain a sophisticated internal management structure to coordinate efforts across these varied environments. Robust communication channels, clear performance metrics for each domain, and proactive risk management are essential for successful execution and oversight of such a wide-ranging contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N0002412R3074

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (UEI: 964725688)

Address: BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC, MC LEAN, VA, 22102

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $69,648,869

Exercised Options: $69,648,869

Current Obligation: $66,366,055

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 3

Total Subaward Amount: $2,947,185

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017804D4024

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline