DoD's $22.5M International Training Contract Awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton Faces Scrutiny

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,552,451 ($22.6M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-10-01

End Date: 2013-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF NETSAFA'S INTERNATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM FOR FOREIGN COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN THE SECURITY COOPERATION EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM/SECURITY ASSISTANCE TRAINING PROGRAM.

Place of Performance

Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.6 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF NETSAFA'S INTERNATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM FOR FOREIGN COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN THE SECURITY COOPERATION EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM/SECURITY ASSISTANCE TRAINING PROGRAM. Key points: 1. Booz Allen Hamilton secured a significant $22.5M contract for international training support. 2. The contract falls under the Defense sector, specifically focusing on professional development. 3. Competition method was 'Full and Open', suggesting a potentially competitive bidding process. 4. The contract duration was 5 years, indicating a long-term commitment. 5. The award was a definitive contract, implying a clear scope and terms.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $22.5M over 5 years is substantial for training services. Benchmarking against similar international security cooperation training contracts is difficult without more specific service details, but the per-unit cost appears moderate given the duration and scope.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which generally promotes competitive pricing. However, the specific impact on price discovery is unknown without details on the number of bids received and the final negotiated price relative to initial proposals.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds were used for international training, aiming to enhance security cooperation. The value for money depends on the effectiveness of the training delivered.

Public Impact

Supports international security cooperation and training for foreign countries. Enhances diplomatic and military relationships through educational programs. Potential for technology transfer and best practice sharing in security matters. Funds allocated for training could have been used for domestic programs. Effectiveness of training directly impacts foreign partner capabilities and U.S. security interests.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Lack of specific performance metrics for training effectiveness.
  • Potential for scope creep in long-term training contracts.
  • Geopolitical risks associated with international training programs.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded through full and open competition.
  • Supports critical national security objectives.
  • Long-term contract provides stability for program execution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional and management development training sector, a common area for government outsourcing. Spending benchmarks for similar international security cooperation training programs are highly variable, depending on the specific countries, duration, and subject matter.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., a large business. There is no indication that small businesses were involved as subcontractors or partners in this specific award, suggesting limited direct impact on the small business sector for this contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and the contracting activity within the Department of Defense. Accountability for training outcomes and financial stewardship rests with these agencies and the contractor.

Related Government Programs

  • Professional and Management Development Training
  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

  • Lack of detailed performance metrics.
  • Potential for geopolitical risks impacting program delivery.
  • Contract duration may lead to adaptability challenges.
  • Limited information on subcontractor involvement.

Tags

professional-and-management-development-, department-of-defense, va, definitive-contract, 10m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.6 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF NETSAFA'S INTERNATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM FOR FOREIGN COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN THE SECURITY COOPERATION EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM/SECURITY ASSISTANCE TRAINING PROGRAM.

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 (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $22.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-10-01. End: 2013-09-30.

What was the specific training curriculum and how was its effectiveness measured?

The provided data does not detail the specific curriculum or the metrics used to measure training effectiveness. Assessing the value requires understanding the learning objectives, the delivery methods, and the post-training performance of the foreign participants. Without this, it's difficult to definitively gauge the return on investment for the $22.5M.

What were the key risks identified during the bidding process and how were they mitigated?

The data does not specify the risks identified during the bidding process. Potential risks could include geopolitical instability in recipient countries, challenges in adapting training to local contexts, or contractor performance issues. Mitigation strategies would typically involve thorough vetting of partners, flexible program design, and robust contract oversight by the DoD.

How does this spending align with broader U.S. foreign policy and security assistance goals?

This spending aligns with U.S. foreign policy by strengthening security partnerships and promoting stability in allied nations through education and training. It supports the Security Cooperation and Security Assistance Training programs, which are key instruments for achieving U.S. geopolitical objectives and enhancing the capabilities of partner forces.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Educational ServicesBusiness Schools and Computer and Management TrainingProfessional and Management Development Training

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT)PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N0018908RZ015

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

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, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,702,720

Exercised Options: $25,702,720

Current Obligation: $22,552,451

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline

Start Date: 2008-10-01

Current End Date: 2013-09-30

Potential End Date: 2013-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-09-28

More Contracts from Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

View all Booz Allen Hamilton Inc federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending