VA's $66.8M contract for financial and CIO support services awarded to Grant Thornton LLP

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $66,813,400 ($66.8M)

Contractor: Grant Thornton LLP

Awarding Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Start Date: 2018-01-05

End Date: 2021-05-10

Contract Duration: 1,221 days

Daily Burn Rate: $54.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES AND CIO SUPPORT SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20420

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Veterans Affairs obligated $66.8 million to GRANT THORNTON LLP for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES AND CIO SUPPORT SERVICES. Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust market. 2. The contract duration of 1221 days indicates a significant, long-term need for these services. 3. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability. 4. The services encompass both financial support and CIO support, indicating a broad scope. 5. The contract was awarded as a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $66.8 million over approximately 3.3 years for administrative management and general management consulting services appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale IT and financial consulting contracts for federal agencies suggests this pricing is within expected ranges. The firm fixed-price nature of the award provides cost certainty for the VA, although it places the risk of cost overruns on the contractor.

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 offers. The presence of 4 bidders suggests a competitive environment, which typically leads to better pricing and service quality for the government. The level of competition is a positive indicator for price discovery and value for money.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition ensures that taxpayer dollars are likely being used efficiently, as multiple firms vied for the contract, driving down costs and improving service offerings.

Public Impact

The Department of Veterans Affairs benefits from enhanced financial management and IT strategic support. Services delivered include critical administrative and general management consulting. The contract's impact is primarily within the District of Columbia, where the VA's headquarters are located. The contract supports a workforce of consultants providing specialized expertise to the VA.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined and managed.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical financial and CIO functions could pose a risk if performance falters.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive process.
Firm fixed-price contract type helps control costs.
Contract duration suggests a stable, long-term need being met.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically administrative management and general management consulting. This is a significant sector for federal spending, with agencies frequently outsourcing specialized expertise. The market for these services is large and competitive, with numerous firms capable of supporting federal IT and financial operations. The VA's spending here is consistent with broader government trends of leveraging external expertise for complex functions.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While there is no direct indication of small business subcontracting requirements, the nature of large consulting contracts often involves opportunities for specialized small businesses to participate as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any subcontracting plans were mandated or voluntarily pursued.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically reside with the contracting officer and program managers within the Department of Veterans Affairs. The firm fixed-price nature provides some cost oversight. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

VA Financial Management Services
VA Information Technology Services
Federal Management Consulting Contracts
CIO Support Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope is not well-defined.
Risk of performance issues impacting critical VA operations.
Contractor personnel turnover could lead to knowledge gaps.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Veterans Affairs awarded $66.8 million to GRANT THORNTON LLP. IGF::OT::IGF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES AND CIO SUPPORT SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRANT THORNTON LLP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (Department of Veterans Affairs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $66.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-01-05. End: 2021-05-10.

What is the track record of Grant Thornton LLP in performing similar federal contracts, particularly for the Department of Veterans Affairs?

Grant Thornton LLP has a significant history of performing federal contracts across various agencies, including the Department of Veterans Affairs. Their experience often spans financial management, audit, advisory, and IT consulting services. For the VA, they have likely been involved in projects related to financial systems modernization, audit support, and strategic IT planning. A review of their past performance evaluations and contract history within federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) would provide specific details on their success rates, any past issues, and the types of services rendered. Their ability to secure a $66.8 million contract suggests a strong track record and confidence from the awarding agency.

How does the awarded value of $66.8 million compare to similar contracts for financial and CIO support services at the VA or other large federal agencies?

The $66.8 million value for a contract spanning over three years for comprehensive financial and CIO support services is substantial but generally aligns with the scale of major federal IT and management consulting engagements. Large agencies like the VA often award multi-million dollar contracts for such critical functions due to the complexity and breadth of their operations. When compared to similar contracts for agencies like the Department of Defense or HHS, this value appears to be within the expected range for a contract of this scope and duration. Factors influencing this value include the number of personnel required, the level of expertise, the specific deliverables, and the overall duration. Without specific benchmark data for identical services, it's reasonable to assess this as a significant but not necessarily outlier investment for the VA's needs.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are likely in place?

Primary risks include potential cost overruns if the fixed-price contract doesn't accurately capture all necessary work, performance deficiencies leading to service disruptions, and contractor personnel turnover impacting institutional knowledge. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust contract management by the VA, including clear performance metrics (SOW), regular progress reviews, and strong communication channels. The firm fixed-price structure inherently places cost risk on the contractor, incentivizing efficiency. For performance risk, the VA would likely have clauses for remedies and potentially termination for default if performance is unacceptable. Managing personnel turnover would rely on the contractor's internal processes and the VA's ability to ensure continuity through knowledge transfer protocols.

How effective is the firm fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for money for this specific service requirement?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for services where the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly. For financial and CIO support services, where tasks can be clearly articulated, FFP provides cost certainty for the government and incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently to maximize profit. This can lead to good value for money as the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. However, if the scope is inherently uncertain or prone to change, FFP can lead to change orders that increase costs, or it might discourage the contractor from proactively suggesting innovative solutions that require additional effort. For this contract, assuming the SOW was well-defined, FFP is a suitable choice for cost control.

What is the historical spending pattern for administrative management and general management consulting services at the Department of Veterans Affairs?

The Department of Veterans Affairs historically spends significant amounts on administrative management and general management consulting services. This is typical for large federal agencies seeking external expertise to improve operational efficiency, manage complex IT projects, and navigate regulatory environments. Spending in this category often fluctuates based on specific agency initiatives, modernization efforts, and budget allocations. Analyzing VA's procurement data over several fiscal years would reveal trends in the total amount obligated for these services, the types of contracts awarded (e.g., FFP, T&M), and the primary contractors. This specific $66.8 million contract represents a notable investment within this broader spending category.

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

Parent Company: Grant Thornton International Ltd (UEI: 347201258)

Address: 1000 WILSON BLVD STE 1400, ARLINGTON, VA, 22209

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $88,574,283

Exercised Options: $68,011,797

Current Obligation: $66,813,400

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00F143CA

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline