DoD's $21M Administrative Management Consulting Contract Awarded to IIF Data Solutions, Inc. in 2007
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $21,134,183 ($21.1M)
Contractor: IIF Data Solutions, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2007-09-27
End Date: 2013-09-27
Contract Duration: 2,192 days
Daily Burn Rate: $9.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: LABOR-FFP BASE YEAR
Place of Performance
Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22204
State: Virginia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $21.1 million to IIF DATA SOLUTIONS, INC. for work described as: LABOR-FFP BASE YEAR Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract utilized a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) structure, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 3. The base year value of over $21 million indicates a significant investment in management consulting services. 4. The contract duration of approximately 6 years (2192 days) suggests a long-term need for these services. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to a focus on administrative management and general management consulting. 6. The award was made by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense. 7. The contractor, IIF Data Solutions, Inc., has secured this substantial contract, indicating a level of trust and capability. 8. The contract was awarded in 2007, providing historical context for current spending patterns.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The base year value of $21.1 million for administrative management consulting services is substantial. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, given the duration and the firm-fixed-price nature, the government aimed to cap costs. Benchmarking against similar large-scale management consulting contracts awarded around 2007 would be necessary for a more precise evaluation of pricing and value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 4 bidders (no) suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant contract. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions, but 4 bidders for a specialized service like this is not necessarily indicative of poor price discovery.
Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award. The presence of multiple bidders allowed the Department of the Army to select the most advantageous offer.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the Department of the Army, receiving administrative and management consulting support. The services delivered likely involve improving operational efficiency, strategic planning, and management practices within the Army. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, where the Department of the Army operates. Workforce implications could include the engagement of specialized consultants and potential internal staff training or restructuring based on recommendations.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly due to the long duration.
- Reliance on a single contractor for critical management functions could pose a risk if performance degrades.
- The fixed-price nature might disincentivize the contractor from proactively identifying cost-saving opportunities beyond the contract scope.
Positive Signals
- Firm Fixed Price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
- Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
- Long contract duration indicates a sustained need and potential for deep integration and understanding of Army processes.
- Award to a specific company (IIF Data Solutions, Inc.) implies they met the required qualifications and offered a competitive solution.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically management consulting. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services to improve efficiency and effectiveness across various agencies. The market for management consulting is large and competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized expertise. This contract represents a substantial portion of spending within this niche for the Department of the Army.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary consideration for this contract, as 'sb' is false and 'ss' is false. This suggests it was not set aside for small businesses, nor were there specific subcontracting goals mandated in the provided data. The award to a single entity without explicit small business set-aside provisions means the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract is likely minimal, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, where the contractor is responsible for delivering services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, where basic contract information is publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Management Consulting Services
- Army Administrative Support Contracts
- Professional Services Contracts
- Management and Consulting Services
- Federal Government Administrative Services
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration may increase risk of obsolescence or changing requirements.
- Firm Fixed Price shifts cost risk to contractor, but requires careful performance monitoring.
- Limited competition (4 bidders) could potentially lead to less competitive pricing than a wider field.
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, administrative-management-consulting, general-management-consulting, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, professional-services, virginia, consulting-services, historical-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $21.1 million to IIF DATA SOLUTIONS, INC.. LABOR-FFP BASE YEAR
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is IIF DATA SOLUTIONS, 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 $21.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-09-27. End: 2013-09-27.
What specific management consulting services did IIF Data Solutions, Inc. provide under this contract?
The contract's NAICS code (541611) specifies 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services.' While the data doesn't detail the exact services, this typically encompasses areas such as organizational structure analysis, process improvement, strategic planning, policy development, and operational efficiency enhancements. Given the Department of the Army context, these services likely supported various administrative functions, resource management, or program implementation efforts. A deeper dive into contract line item numbers (CLINs) or performance work statements (PWS) would be required for a precise breakdown of deliverables.
How does the $21.1 million base year cost compare to similar contracts for administrative management consulting within the DoD around 2007?
The $21.1 million base year cost is a significant figure for administrative management consulting. To benchmark this, one would need to analyze other DoD contracts awarded between 2006-2008 for similar services (NAICS 541611) with comparable durations and scopes. Factors like the specific agency, complexity of the task, and the number of bidders influence pricing. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts from that period, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents high, low, or average spending. However, for a multi-year, firm-fixed-price contract, this amount suggests a substantial engagement.
What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract?
The provided data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract. Typically, for management consulting contracts, KPIs might relate to improvements in efficiency (e.g., reduced processing times), cost savings achieved, successful implementation of new strategies or policies, or client satisfaction surveys. The firm-fixed-price nature implies that the contractor was responsible for meeting defined objectives, but the exact metrics would be detailed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) or contract clauses, which are not available in this summary data.
What is the track record of IIF Data Solutions, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?
The award of this $21.1 million contract in 2007 by the Department of the Army suggests that IIF Data Solutions, Inc. had a relevant track record and met the government's requirements at the time. To fully assess their track record, one would need to examine their complete federal contract history, including other awards, past performance evaluations, and any history of contract disputes or terminations. A review of the System for Award Management (SAM) or other federal procurement databases would provide a more comprehensive view of their experience and performance with government agencies.
Were there any identified risks or challenges associated with this contract award or its execution?
While the data doesn't explicitly list risks, potential challenges for a contract of this nature and duration (2007-2013) could include adapting to evolving military needs, ensuring consistent quality of service over time, managing personnel turnover within the contractor team, and maintaining effective communication between the contractor and government stakeholders. The firm-fixed-price structure inherently carries risk for the contractor regarding cost overruns if not managed efficiently. The government's risk would be ensuring the contractor meets all performance obligations.
How has spending on administrative management and general management consulting services by the Department of the Army evolved since this contract ended?
To analyze the evolution of spending, one would need to track the Department of the Army's procurement data for NAICS code 541611 (and potentially related codes) from 2013 onwards. This would involve looking at total obligated amounts, number of contracts awarded, and average contract values over subsequent years. Such an analysis would reveal trends in the Army's reliance on external consulting services, shifts in contracting strategies (e.g., more or less competition, different contract types), and potentially changes in the types of consulting services prioritized.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting 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: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 14850 CONFERENCE CTR DR STE 110, CHANTILLY, VA, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Veteran Owned Business, Woman Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $23,330,050
Exercised Options: $21,134,183
Current Obligation: $21,134,183
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: GS10F0171N
IDV Type: FSS
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-09-27
Current End Date: 2013-09-27
Potential End Date: 2013-09-27 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2014-03-09
More Contracts from IIF Data Solutions, Inc.
- TAS::21 2020::TAS 200509!500356!2100!w9133l!national Guard Bureau, Cntrctng !gs10f0171n !C!N! !n!w9133l05f0130! !20050505!20060505!114706695!114706695!114706695!n!iif Data Solutions, Inc !5885 Trinity Parkway !centreville !va!20120!03000!013!51!arlington !arlington !virginia !+000004207064!n!n!000000000000!r799!other Management Support Services !S1 !services !000 !* !561499!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !y!b!y!n! !B! ! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $26.0M (Department of Defense)
- National Guard Professional Support TAS::21 2020::TAS — $16.2M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)