DoD's $9.8M Consulting Contract Awarded to URS Federal Services for Administrative Management

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,856,109 ($9.9M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-09-29

End Date: 2006-10-02

Contract Duration: 368 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: QUANTICO, PRINCE WILLIAM County, VIRGINIA, 22134

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $9.9 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value of $9.8M for administrative management services suggests a significant need for specialized support. 2. The award was made under full and open competition, indicating a broad market search. 3. A firm-fixed-price contract type generally transfers risk to the contractor, potentially benefiting the government. 4. The contract duration of 368 days points to a medium-term engagement for specific project needs. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 signifies a focus on management consulting. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Navy, a major component of the DoD. 7. The contractor, URS Federal Services, Inc., has experience in providing services to government entities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $9.8 million for administrative management and general management consulting services appears within a reasonable range for a federal contract of this nature. Benchmarking against similar contracts for management consulting services within the Department of Defense would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The firm-fixed-price contract type is generally favorable for the government as it caps costs. However, without detailed task orders and performance metrics, a definitive assessment of cost-effectiveness is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The presence of 6 bids indicates a competitive environment, which typically leads to better pricing and service offerings for the government. The agency's decision to pursue full and open competition implies confidence in the market's ability to provide suitable solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and improve the quality of services received.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from specialized administrative and management consulting expertise. Services delivered likely include process improvement, organizational efficiency, and strategic planning support. The geographic impact is primarily within the operational areas of the Department of the Navy. Workforce implications may involve supporting existing government personnel or providing external project management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The administrative management and general management consulting services sector is a significant part of the federal contracting landscape, supporting various government functions. This contract falls within the professional services category, which is crucial for enhancing operational efficiency and strategic execution within large organizations like the Department of Defense. Comparable spending benchmarks for management consulting within the DoD can vary widely based on the specific services required, but a $9.8 million award for a year-long engagement is substantial.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless URS Federal Services, Inc. voluntarily engages small businesses as subcontractors. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be necessary to fully assess the impact.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contract administration office within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price structure, requiring the contractor to deliver services within the agreed-upon cost and timeline. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific performance details may be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, administrative-management, general-management-consulting-services, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, urs-federal-services-inc, virginia, professional-services, consulting

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $9.9 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $9.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-09-29. End: 2006-10-02.

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

While the NAICS code 541611 covers a broad range of services, specific task orders under this contract likely detailed the precise deliverables. These could include areas such as organizational analysis, process improvement initiatives, strategic planning support, human capital management consulting, financial management consulting, or operational efficiency studies. The Department of the Navy would have defined these requirements based on their immediate needs for enhancing administrative functions and overall management effectiveness. Without access to the detailed contract statements of work, the exact nature of the consulting services remains generalized.

How does the $9.8 million award compare to typical spending on similar consulting services by the Department of the Navy?

The $9.8 million award for a contract lasting approximately one year is a significant investment. To benchmark this effectively, one would need to analyze historical spending data for similar NAICS codes (541611) and contract types (firm-fixed-price) awarded by the Department of the Navy or other Department of Defense components. Factors such as the specific scope of work, duration, and the number of bidders influence pricing. A preliminary assessment suggests this is a substantial contract, indicating a considerable need for the services rendered. Further analysis of contract databases would reveal if this amount is typical or an outlier for comparable engagements.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the success of URS Federal Services, Inc. on this contract?

Performance indicators for consulting contracts are typically defined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Work (SOW). For administrative and management consulting, KPIs might include metrics related to the successful implementation of recommended process improvements, achievement of efficiency targets, timely delivery of reports and analyses, client satisfaction surveys, and adherence to project milestones and budget. The Department of the Navy would have established these KPIs to ensure the contractor met the objectives of the contract and provided tangible value. Post-award evaluations and contract close-out documentation would contain information on performance assessments.

What is the track record of URS Federal Services, Inc. in performing similar federal contracts?

URS Federal Services, Inc. has a history of performing contracts for various U.S. federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their experience likely encompasses a range of professional services, potentially including management and administrative consulting, engineering, and environmental services. A review of their contract history would reveal the types of services rendered, their performance ratings on past contracts, and their success in competitive bidding processes. Their ability to secure a $9.8 million contract with the Department of the Navy suggests a demonstrated capability and a positive track record with government clients.

Were there any identified risks or challenges associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?

Potential risks in such consulting contracts can include scope creep, contractor performance issues, budget overruns (though mitigated by FFP), and challenges in integrating recommendations into existing government operations. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust contract management, clear definition of scope and deliverables, regular progress reviews, performance monitoring against KPIs, and strong communication channels between the government and the contractor. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract itself acts as a risk mitigation tool by capping the government's financial exposure. Specific risk mitigation plans would be detailed within the contract documentation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesAdministrative 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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM Global II, LLC (UEI: 043271568)

Address: 20501 SENECA MEADOWS PARKWAY, SUITE 300, GERMANTOWN, MD, 06

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: M6785402A9011

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-09-29

Current End Date: 2006-10-02

Potential End Date: 2006-10-02 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2010-05-19

More Contracts from URS Federal Services, Inc.

View all URS Federal Services, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending