Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $26.1M for Computer Systems Design Services, highlighting long-term IT support needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,171,869 ($26.2M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-11-30

End Date: 2009-05-31

Contract Duration: 1,643 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (TWO OR MORE)

Sector: IT

Place of Performance

Location: CLARKSBURG, HARRISON County, WEST VIRGINIA, 26301

State: West Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.2 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value suggests significant, ongoing IT infrastructure requirements. 2. Full and open competition indicates a potentially robust market for these services. 3. The contract's duration points to a need for stable, long-term vendor relationships. 4. Awarded to a single contractor, raising questions about potential for future consolidation. 5. Geographic location in West Virginia may indicate specific regional IT support focus. 6. The nature of computer systems design services is critical for operational efficiency.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $26.1 million over approximately 4.5 years averages to about $5.8 million annually. Without specific performance metrics or detailed service breakdowns, it is challenging to benchmark this against similar contracts. However, for specialized IT design services, this annual figure appears within a reasonable range, though a deeper dive into the scope of work would be necessary for a definitive value assessment. The absence of a small business set-aside might suggest the scale or complexity of services required, potentially favoring larger, established firms.

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 is generally preferred as it fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and service quality. The fact that it was competed openly implies that the government sought the best value from the market. However, the award to a single entity, Booz Allen Hamilton, indicates they were the most advantageous offer.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for competitive pricing and ensures that the government is not limited to a single provider, which could drive up costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely Department of Defense operations requiring advanced computer systems design and integration. Services delivered include the design, development, and potentially maintenance of complex IT systems. The geographic impact is centered in West Virginia, suggesting support for regional military or government facilities. Workforce implications may include the need for specialized IT professionals, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in the IT sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in due to the long contract duration.
Lack of transparency on specific performance metrics makes value assessment difficult.
Reliance on a single large contractor could limit future competition or innovation.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible process.
Long contract duration suggests a stable and reliable IT support solution for the agency.
Booz Allen Hamilton is a well-established contractor with a significant presence in the federal IT space.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology sector, specifically focusing on computer systems design services. This is a critical area for government operations, encompassing everything from network infrastructure to software development and cybersecurity. The market for IT services is highly competitive, with numerous large and small businesses vying for federal contracts. The value of this contract, while substantial, is one of many within the broader federal IT spending landscape, which often runs into billions annually across various agencies and service types.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the 'sb' field is false. This suggests that the scope or nature of the required services may have been better suited for larger, more established companies with the capacity and expertise to handle complex IT design projects. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans, but typically, large prime contractors are encouraged or required to engage small businesses in their subcontracting efforts, which could still provide opportunities for SMBs.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the program management office within the Department of the Army. Performance reviews, milestone tracking, and financial audits are standard oversight mechanisms. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though detailed internal performance data may not be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

IT Professional Services
Computer Systems Design
Information Technology Support Services
Defense IT Modernization
Federal IT Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may lead to technological obsolescence.
Potential for vendor lock-in due to specialized knowledge.
Lack of detailed performance metrics in public data.
Award to a single large contractor could limit future market entry.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.2 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. See the official description on USAspending.

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 Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-11-30. End: 2009-05-31.

What specific computer systems design services were rendered under this contract?

The contract, NAICS code 541512, specifies 'Computer Systems Design Services.' This broad category typically encompasses designing and integrating computer hardware and software systems. Services could include analyzing user needs, designing system architecture, developing custom software, implementing and testing systems, and providing ongoing IT consulting. Without access to the detailed Statement of Work (SOW), the precise nature of the services—whether focused on network infrastructure, application development, cybersecurity integration, or cloud migration—remains unspecified. However, the substantial value and duration suggest a comprehensive and critical role in supporting the agency's IT infrastructure and operational capabilities.

How does the $26.1 million award compare to similar IT design contracts awarded by the Department of Defense?

Benchmarking this $26.1 million contract requires comparing it to similar 'Computer Systems Design Services' (NAICS 541512) contracts awarded by the Department of Defense (DoD) within a comparable timeframe. Given the contract's award date (2004) and duration (ending 2009), direct comparisons to current market rates would be less accurate due to inflation and technological evolution. However, for a contract of this size and scope awarded over approximately 4.5 years, it represents a significant investment. Larger DoD IT contracts can range from tens of millions to billions, depending on complexity and scale. This particular award suggests a substantial, but not exceptionally large, project within the DoD's IT portfolio during that period, likely supporting specific operational units or infrastructure needs.

What are the key risks associated with a long-term IT services contract like this one?

Long-term IT services contracts, such as this 4.5-year award, carry several inherent risks. One primary risk is technological obsolescence; the IT landscape evolves rapidly, and systems designed at the outset may become outdated before the contract concludes. Another risk is vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes heavily reliant on the incumbent contractor, making it difficult and costly to switch providers or adopt new technologies. Performance degradation over time is also a concern, as contractor motivation or capability might wane. Furthermore, cost overruns can occur if the scope of work expands or if initial estimates were inaccurate. Finally, security vulnerabilities introduced during the design or integration phases pose a significant risk to sensitive government data and operations.

What was Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with the federal government around the time of this award?

Around the time of this award in late 2004, Booz Allen Hamilton was already a well-established and significant federal contractor, particularly within the defense and intelligence sectors. They had a long history of providing a wide range of professional services, including IT consulting, systems engineering, and strategic planning. Their track record generally indicated a strong capability in handling large, complex government projects. While specific performance details for individual contracts are often not public, Booz Allen's consistent presence and substantial contract awards across multiple agencies suggested a high level of trust and perceived competence from the government at that time. They were known for their deep expertise in technology and management consulting for federal clients.

How does the 'full and open competition' designation impact the potential value for taxpayers?

The 'full and open competition' designation is generally positive for taxpayers. It means that the government solicited bids from all responsible sources, maximizing the pool of potential offerors. This broad competition typically drives down prices as contractors vie to offer the most attractive bid. It also encourages innovation and efficiency, as companies must differentiate themselves on factors like price, technical approach, and past performance. For taxpayers, this process increases the likelihood that the government is receiving the best possible value for its money, avoiding the potentially higher costs associated with sole-source or limited competition awards where choices are restricted.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (TWO OR MORE) (2)

Contractor Details

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

Address: 8283 GREENSBORO DR # 700, MC LEAN, VA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00T99ALD0202

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline