Department of Defense awarded $11.6M for administrative management consulting services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,622,575 ($11.6M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-10-17

End Date: 2009-07-25

Contract Duration: 647 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: {PIIN: W91GDW08C2000} 500 MAN-CAMP

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.6 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: {PIIN: W91GDW08C2000} 500 MAN-CAMP Key points: 1. Contract value represents a moderate investment in management consulting. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a potentially competitive bidding environment. 3. Contract duration of 647 days indicates a medium-term service requirement. 4. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 5. The award falls within the administrative management and general management consulting services sector. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized for this procurement.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $11.6 million for administrative management consulting services over approximately two years appears within a reasonable range for such engagements. Benchmarking against similar contracts for management consulting services would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The fixed-price nature of the contract suggests an effort to establish a clear cost ceiling, which is positive for cost control. However, without specific deliverables or performance metrics, a definitive assessment of value is challenging.

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 bids. The number of bidders is not specified, but full and open competition generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and service offerings. The agency's decision to use this procurement method suggests confidence in the market's ability to provide suitable solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it promotes a wider range of offers, potentially driving down prices and improving the quality of services received.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely Department of Defense components requiring administrative and management expertise. Services delivered are expected to enhance operational efficiency and management practices within the agency. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Defense's operational areas. Workforce implications may include the engagement of external consultants to supplement internal capabilities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess contractor effectiveness.
The broad nature of 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' could lead to scope creep if not tightly managed.
Reliance on external consultants may not foster long-term internal capability development.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process.
Fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract duration aligns with a defined project scope, implying structured engagement.

Sector Analysis

The administrative management and general management consulting services sector is a significant market supporting government and private sector operations. This contract, valued at $11.6 million, represents a moderate investment within this sector. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar consulting services within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would provide further context on the scale of this award. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 categorizes this as a standard consulting service.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses mentioned in the provided data. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific contract may be limited unless they are prime contractors or choose to subcontract independently. The absence of set-asides suggests the agency did not prioritize small business participation for this particular procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the administrative contracting officer within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver services within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of contract awards, though detailed performance reports may not be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Management and Consulting Services
Department of Defense Administrative Support Contracts
Federal Management Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep due to broad service category.
Lack of specific performance metrics in summary data.
Contractor past performance not detailed in provided data.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.6 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. {PIIN: W91GDW08C2000} 500 MAN-CAMP

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-10-17. End: 2009-07-25.

What specific types of administrative and management consulting services were procured under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 541611, 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services.' This broad category typically encompasses services such as organizational planning, business process improvement, strategic planning, operational analysis, and management structure development. Without access to the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS), the precise nature of the services remains general. However, it is reasonable to infer that the Department of the Army sought external expertise to address specific challenges or opportunities related to its administrative functions or overall management strategies.

How does the $11.6 million contract value compare to typical spending on similar consulting services by the Department of Defense?

The $11.6 million contract value for administrative management consulting services is a moderate sum within the context of the Department of Defense's vast budget. The DoD frequently procures consulting services across various domains, including strategy, operations, technology, and human capital. While specific benchmarks for 'administrative management' consulting are not readily available without deeper analysis of historical contract data, the DoD awards numerous contracts in the multi-million dollar range for specialized consulting. This award appears to be a standard engagement for addressing specific management needs rather than a large-scale, enterprise-wide transformation project. Further comparison would require analyzing contracts with similar NAICS codes and scope over recent fiscal years.

What are the potential risks associated with a fixed-price contract for consulting services?

While fixed-price contracts are generally favored for cost control, they can introduce risks for both the government and the contractor when applied to services, especially consulting. For the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability if the fixed price proves too low or if unforeseen complexities arise. Conversely, if the fixed price is too high, the government may overpay for the services. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating the effort required, leading to reduced profit margins or even losses. Effective risk mitigation for this contract would involve a clearly defined SOW, robust oversight, and regular communication to ensure the delivered services meet expectations without scope creep or quality degradation.

What was the contractor's track record or past performance at the time of this award?

The provided data does not include information on the contractor's track record or past performance. Federal procurement regulations require agencies to consider past performance when making award decisions, especially for negotiated contracts. However, the specific details of how the contractor's past performance was evaluated for this particular award (W91GDW08C2000) are not present in the summary data. To assess this, one would typically need to review the source selection documentation or contractor performance assessment reporting system (CPARS) data, which are not included here.

How does the contract duration of 647 days (approximately 21 months) influence the assessment of this award?

A contract duration of 647 days suggests a medium-term engagement, which is typical for many consulting projects. This timeframe allows for a reasonable period to define objectives, execute tasks, and achieve desired outcomes without being excessively long, which could lead to outdated strategies or increased costs. For administrative and management consulting, this duration might accommodate phases such as assessment, planning, implementation support, and initial evaluation. It implies a project of substantial scope that requires sustained effort. A shorter duration might indicate a more focused, tactical engagement, while a significantly longer one could suggest an ongoing operational support role or a very complex, multi-faceted initiative.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: MISCELLANEOUS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,622,575

Exercised Options: $11,622,575

Current Obligation: $11,622,575

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline