DoD's $35.4M contract for management consulting services awarded to URS Federal Services, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,435,877 ($35.4M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-04-13

End Date: 2015-04-15

Contract Duration: 1,097 days

Daily Burn Rate: $32.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: QUANTICO, PRINCE WILLIAM County, VIRGINIA, 22134, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $35.4 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC. for work described as: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract's value of $35.4 million over approximately three years indicates a significant investment in professional services. 3. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541611 points to a focus on administrative and general management consulting. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, this contract likely supports strategic or operational initiatives within the naval forces. 5. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. 6. The contract duration of 1097 days (approx. 3 years) allows for sustained support and project completion.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without detailed scope of work and deliverables. However, a $35.4 million contract for management consulting over three years is substantial. The firm fixed-price nature shifts cost risk to the contractor, which can be favorable for the government if managed well. Further analysis would require comparing the awarded price against similar, independently procured consulting services for the Department of Defense or Navy, considering the complexity and duration.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This typically leads to a more robust selection process and potentially better pricing due to market forces. With 6 bids received, the competition level appears moderate, suggesting that while multiple firms were interested, the market might not be saturated with providers for this specific service. The level of competition can influence price discovery and the government's ability to secure favorable terms.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process generally benefits taxpayers by driving down costs and encouraging efficiency from the awarded contractor. The presence of multiple bids suggests that taxpayer funds are likely being used more judiciously than in a sole-source scenario.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Navy, receiving expert advice and support to enhance administrative and management functions. Services delivered are expected to include strategic planning, organizational efficiency improvements, and general management consulting. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of the Navy's operational areas, potentially supporting naval bases or administrative centers. Workforce implications could involve the utilization of specialized consulting expertise, potentially augmenting or advising existing government personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value and impact of the consulting services.
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 build long-term internal capacity within the Department of the Navy.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair and transparent procurement process.
Firm fixed-price contract type transfers cost overrun risk to the contractor.
A duration of nearly three years allows for comprehensive project execution and sustained support.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically management and administrative consulting. The market for these services is vast, with numerous firms competing for government contracts. The Department of Defense, as a major government client, frequently procures such services to optimize operations, manage complex projects, and implement strategic changes. Benchmarking against similar contracts would involve looking at other large-scale management consulting awards within federal agencies, particularly those focused on organizational efficiency and administrative support.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While URS Federal Services, Inc. may engage small businesses as subcontractors, the primary award was not directed towards small business set-asides. This means the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract is likely limited to subcontracting opportunities, rather than direct prime contract awards.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally maintained through the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), where contract awards are reported. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Management Consulting Services
Naval Operations Support Contracts
Federal Administrative Services Procurement
General Management Consulting Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if not tightly managed.
Dependence on contractor for specialized expertise.
Need for robust government oversight to ensure quality and adherence to objectives.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $35.4 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES, INC.. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

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 $35.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-04-13. End: 2015-04-15.

What specific management challenges was URS Federal Services, Inc. contracted to address for the Department of the Navy?

The provided data specifies the contract's NAICS code as 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services) and the awarding agency as the Department of the Navy. However, it does not detail the specific management challenges or projects. Typically, contracts of this nature are awarded to address issues such as improving organizational efficiency, streamlining administrative processes, developing strategic plans, implementing new management systems, or providing expert advice on operational effectiveness. Without access to the contract's statement of work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS), the precise objectives remain unspecified. Further investigation into contract award documents or agency procurement histories would be necessary to identify the exact problems being solved.

How does the $35.4 million contract value compare to typical spending on management consulting by the Department of the Navy?

Comparing the $35.4 million contract value requires context regarding the Department of the Navy's overall spending on management consulting and the typical size of such contracts. The Department of the Navy, as a major component of the DoD, has a substantial budget and frequently procures professional services, including management consulting. A contract of this magnitude, awarded over approximately three years, is significant but not necessarily an outlier for a large federal agency. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze historical spending data for similar NAICS codes (e.g., 541611) awarded by the Navy, looking at the average contract value, the number of contracts awarded annually, and the distribution of contract sizes. This would help determine if $35.4 million represents a high, low, or average investment for this type of service.

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

The provided data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. In a firm fixed-price contract, success is primarily measured by the contractor's ability to deliver the agreed-upon goods or services within the specified timeframe and budget. However, for consulting services, qualitative assessments and adherence to milestones outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW) are crucial. The Department of the Navy would likely have established metrics related to the quality of deliverables, timeliness of reports, effectiveness of recommendations, and overall client satisfaction. Without access to the SOW or performance reports, these specific KPIs remain unknown. Contract close-out documentation or performance reviews would typically contain this information.

What is the track record of URS Federal Services, Inc. in delivering similar management consulting services to the federal government?

URS Federal Services, Inc. has a history of performing various contracts with the federal government. While the provided data focuses on this specific $35.4 million award, a comprehensive assessment of their track record would involve reviewing their past performance on similar management consulting contracts. This includes examining contract values, durations, agencies served, and client feedback or past performance evaluations. Databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) and potentially contractor performance assessment reporting tools (CPARS) would offer insights into their reliability, quality of service, and ability to meet contractual obligations. A review of their broader portfolio would indicate their experience in administrative and general management consulting specifically.

Are there any potential risks associated with this contract, such as cost overruns or performance deficiencies, given the firm fixed-price nature?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type inherently shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor, URS Federal Services, Inc. This means that if the contractor's costs exceed the agreed-upon price, they absorb the difference. This structure is generally favorable for the government as it provides cost certainty. However, risks can still arise. If the scope of work is poorly defined or changes significantly, it could lead to disputes or a contractor attempting to cut corners to maintain profitability, potentially impacting performance quality. Performance deficiencies are always a risk, regardless of contract type, and would be managed through contract oversight, performance monitoring, and potential remedies outlined in the contract if standards are not met. The government's risk is primarily related to ensuring the contractor meets the defined performance standards and deliverables.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM (UEI: 153561212)

Address: 20501 SENECA MEADOWS PARKWAY, SUITE 300, GERMANTOWN, MD, 20876

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $35,435,877

Exercised Options: $35,435,877

Current Obligation: $35,435,877

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: M6785402A9011

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline