DoD's $93.8M contract for banking services awarded to Bank of America in 2000, expiring 2006

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,704,539 ($11.7M)

Contractor: Bank of America NA

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2000-09-29

End Date: 2006-09-12

Contract Duration: 2,174 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200012!9700!000091!ZF21 !DEF FINANCE & ACCTG SVC HDQTS !GS23F98004 !C!*!MDA21098F0031P00005!20000929!20000930!938917044!006911747!055169452!N!1EJD8!BANK OF AMERICA N. A. !THREE COMMMERCIAL PLACE , !NORFOLK !DE!23510!50000!001!11!WASHINGTON !DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA !D.C. !0001!+000011324789!N!N!000000000000!R711!BANKING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !6021!5!B!S!C!B!A!*!A !*!J!0!002!B!* !C!*!*!* !* !*!C!*!Z!Z!A!A!A!A!* !*!N!*!B!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: NORFOLK, NORFOLK (CITY) County, VIRGINIA, 23510

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.7 million to BANK OF AMERICA NA for work described as: 200012!9700!000091!ZF21 !DEF FINANCE & ACCTG SVC HDQTS !GS23F98004 !C!*!MDA21098F0031P00005!20000929!20000930!938917044!006911747!055169452!N!1EJD8!BANK OF AMERICA N. A. !THREE COMMMERCIAL PLACE , !NORFOLK !DE!23510!50000!001!11!WASHINGTON !DIS… Key points: 1. The contract, valued at $93.8 million, was for banking services. 2. Awarded to Bank of America, indicating a significant financial institution's involvement. 3. The contract duration was over 6 years, suggesting a long-term need. 4. The sector is financial services, crucial for government operations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $93.8M over six years for banking services appears reasonable given the scale of government operations. However, without specific service details or benchmarks for similar large-scale government banking contracts, a precise pricing assessment is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. This method generally promotes competitive pricing and ensures the government receives fair value.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

Taxpayers benefit from competitive bidding processes that aim for cost-effectiveness. Government agencies rely on stable banking services for efficient financial management. The award to a major financial institution highlights the critical role of private sector partnerships in government operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific service details makes it hard to assess value for money.
Long contract duration could lead to outdated services if not managed well.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition.
Contract awarded to a reputable financial institution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the financial services sector, specifically banking services for the Department of Defense. Government spending in this area is essential for managing funds, processing payments, and other financial operations, with benchmarks often tied to transaction volumes and service complexity.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate any specific provisions or set-asides for small businesses in this contract. Large financial services contracts are often dominated by major institutions, potentially limiting opportunities for smaller firms.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of Defense, which has established oversight mechanisms for financial contracts. However, the effectiveness of this oversight in ensuring optimal value and service delivery over the contract's lifespan would require further investigation.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of detailed service scope.
Long contract duration without clear adjustment clauses.
No explicit mention of performance metrics or oversight details.
Potential for uncompetitive pricing if market conditions changed significantly.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.7 million to BANK OF AMERICA NA. 200012!9700!000091!ZF21 !DEF FINANCE & ACCTG SVC HDQTS !GS23F98004 !C!*!MDA21098F0031P00005!20000929!20000930!938917044!006911747!055169452!N!1EJD8!BANK OF AMERICA N. A. !THREE COMMMERCIAL PLACE , !NORFOLK !DE!23510!50000!001!11!WASHINGTON !DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA !D.C. !0001!+000011324789!N!N!000000000000!R711!BANKING SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !6021!5!B!S!C!B!A!*!A !*!J!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BANK OF AMERICA NA.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-09-29. End: 2006-09-12.

What specific banking services were included in this contract, and how did their scope compare to industry standards for similar government contracts?

The provided data lists 'BANKING SERVICES' as the service type but lacks granular detail on specific offerings such as treasury management, payment processing, or account maintenance. A comprehensive comparison to industry standards would require access to the contract's statement of work and a benchmark analysis of similar large-scale government banking agreements to ascertain if the scope was appropriate for the price paid.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how was Bank of America's performance measured against them?

The available data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) established for this contract or detail how Bank of America's performance was monitored. Effective oversight typically involves regular performance reviews against defined metrics related to service uptime, transaction accuracy, customer support, and security. Without this information, assessing the contractor's effectiveness and accountability is challenging.

Given the contract's duration and the evolution of financial technology, were there mechanisms for service or price adjustments to ensure continued value?

The contract data indicates a duration of over six years (2000-2006) with a fixed price. While fixed-price contracts offer budget certainty, they may not always adapt well to technological advancements or market shifts. The absence of information on potential contract modifications or renegotiation clauses suggests that the government might have been locked into the initial terms, potentially missing opportunities for cost savings or service enhancements.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Bank of America Corporation (UEI: 055169452)

Address: 655 S BAY RD, DOVER, DE, 00

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F98004

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline