Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $40.8M contract for CENTCOM resources analysis support by GSA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $40,776,663 ($40.8M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2022-09-24

End Date: 2026-09-23

Contract Duration: 1,460 days

Daily Burn Rate: $27.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: CENTCOM RESOURCES ANALYSIS SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH County, FLORIDA, 33621

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $40.8 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: CENTCOM RESOURCES ANALYSIS SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract provides critical analytical support for CENTCOM operations, enhancing resource allocation and strategic planning. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Performance is expected over a 4-year period, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The use of Time and Materials pricing may present cost control challenges if not closely monitored. 5. This award falls within the Engineering Services NAICS code, aligning with specialized analytical capabilities. 6. The contract's value is substantial, reflecting the complexity and importance of the support required.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $40.8 million over four years suggests a significant investment in analytical support. Benchmarking against similar contracts for strategic analysis and resource management within defense agencies indicates this is within a reasonable range, though specific performance metrics would be needed for a definitive value-for-money assessment. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, requires diligent oversight to ensure costs remain aligned with the value delivered and do not escalate beyond initial projections. Without detailed task orders and performance data, a precise value comparison is challenging, but the competitive award process provides some assurance of fair pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 5 bidders indicates a healthy level of competition for this requirement. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and encourages contractors to offer their best value propositions. The fact that multiple firms vied for this contract suggests that the market has sufficient capacity and interest in providing these specialized analytical services.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process as it typically drives down costs and ensures the government receives services at a fair market price. The multiple bids suggest that the government was able to secure competitive pricing for these essential analytical functions.

Public Impact

CENTCOM (U.S. Central Command) is the primary beneficiary, receiving enhanced analytical capabilities for its operations. The services delivered will support strategic planning, resource management, and operational decision-making within CENTCOM. The contract is managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) on behalf of CENTCOM, indicating federal-level procurement expertise. The contract is based in Florida (ST, SN), suggesting a concentration of analytical support activities in that region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials (T&M) pricing can lead to cost overruns if not managed rigorously, potentially exceeding the anticipated value.
The broad scope of 'resources analysis support' could lead to scope creep if not clearly defined and monitored through task orders.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical analytical support may pose a risk if performance issues arise or if the contractor's capabilities become outdated.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process and potential for competitive pricing.
The contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, is a well-established firm with significant experience in government contracting and analytical services.
The contract duration of four years suggests a stable, long-term need for these services, implying consistent support for CENTCOM.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), which encompasses firms providing engineering consulting and related services. The market for defense and intelligence analysis support is substantial, with numerous large and small businesses competing for federal contracts. Booz Allen Hamilton is a major player in this space, often securing large contracts for strategic, technical, and analytical support. This award represents a portion of the broader federal spending on professional services aimed at enhancing national security and operational effectiveness, where specialized analytical capabilities are highly valued.

Small Business Impact

This contract was awarded to Booz Allen Hamilton, a large business, and there is no indication of a small business set-aside. Given the nature and value of the contract, it is unlikely that significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses will be mandated, although the prime contractor may engage small businesses for specialized support. The absence of a small business set-aside means that the direct economic benefit to the small business ecosystem from this specific award is likely limited.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), which has established procurement and oversight processes. Oversight will likely involve regular performance reviews, monitoring of task orders, and financial audits to ensure compliance with contract terms and conditions. The Time and Materials (T&M) nature of the contract necessitates close monitoring of labor hours and material costs by the contracting officer's representative (COR) to prevent cost overruns and ensure fair pricing. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements.

Related Government Programs

Defense Intelligence Analysis
CENTCOM Operations Support
Strategic Planning Services
Federal Consulting Services
Engineering and Management Consulting

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
Scope creep risk if requirements are not clearly defined and managed.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical analytical functions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $40.8 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. CENTCOM RESOURCES ANALYSIS SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $40.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-09-24. End: 2026-09-23.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with similar large-scale analytical support contracts for defense agencies?

Booz Allen Hamilton has a long and extensive history of providing analytical, consulting, and technical support services to various U.S. federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and intelligence community components. They are frequently awarded large, complex contracts requiring strategic analysis, program management, cybersecurity, and data analytics. Their track record includes significant work with CENTCOM and other combatant commands, often focusing on operational planning, intelligence analysis, and resource optimization. While specific performance details on past contracts are often proprietary, their consistent win rate on competitive bids for similar services suggests a strong capability and a generally positive performance history in the eyes of government evaluators. However, like any large contractor, they have faced scrutiny and occasional contract disputes, underscoring the importance of ongoing performance monitoring.

How does the $40.8 million contract value compare to typical spending on similar analytical support services for combatant commands?

The $40.8 million contract value over four years, averaging approximately $10.2 million annually, is within the expected range for specialized analytical support services provided to a major combatant command like CENTCOM. Such commands require sophisticated analysis for strategic planning, operational effectiveness, intelligence assessment, and resource management. Contracts of this nature often involve high-level expertise and dedicated teams. While exact comparisons are difficult without knowing the specific scope and deliverables, similar contracts awarded to large, established firms for comprehensive support to combatant commands can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars per year. The value reflects the complexity, criticality, and duration of the services required to support a geographically vast and operationally demanding region.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure used in this contract?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M contracts reimburse the contractor for the actual labor hours expended and the cost of materials used, plus a fixed fee or நிர்ணயம். If the scope of work is not tightly controlled, or if the contractor's efficiency is low, the total cost can escalate significantly beyond initial estimates. This requires robust oversight from the government's Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) to monitor labor hours, ensure efficient work practices, and validate the necessity of all materials purchased. Without diligent management, T&M contracts can result in the government paying more than anticipated for the services rendered, potentially diminishing the overall value for money.

How effective is the full and open competition process in ensuring value for money for this type of specialized analytical service?

The full and open competition process is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money, especially for specialized services like analytical support. By allowing all responsible sources to compete, the government maximizes the pool of potential offerors, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. The presence of five bidders in this case suggests that the market was sufficiently robust to support competition. This process allows the government to compare proposals based on both technical merit and price, selecting the offer that provides the best overall value. While effective, the success of competition in achieving value for money also depends on the clarity of the solicitation's requirements and the rigor of the evaluation process.

What are the potential implications of this contract award on future spending patterns for CENTCOM's analytical support needs?

This award suggests a continued reliance on contracted support for CENTCOM's analytical needs, reflecting a broader trend in federal agencies outsourcing specialized functions. The $40.8 million value indicates a significant and ongoing requirement. Future spending patterns may involve follow-on contracts, task orders under this contract, or similar competitive awards to other large firms if CENTCOM's needs evolve or if different contractors demonstrate superior capabilities or pricing in subsequent competitions. It signals that the agency views external expertise as crucial for its strategic and operational analysis, potentially leading to sustained budget allocations for such services rather than an immediate shift towards in-house capabilities.

Are there specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) associated with this contract that would allow for a deeper value assessment?

The provided data does not include specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, such metrics would be detailed within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS). These KPIs are crucial for a comprehensive value assessment, as they define the standards by which the contractor's performance is measured (e.g., timeliness of reports, accuracy of analysis, responsiveness to requests). Without these specific metrics, assessing the true value for money is challenging, relying instead on broader indicators like the competitive award process and the contractor's general reputation. A thorough review would require access to the SOW/PWS to understand the defined success criteria and how performance against these criteria translates into value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 47QFSA22Q0088

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation

Address: 8283 GREENSBORO DR, MC LEAN, VA, 22102

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $51,158,141

Exercised Options: $41,018,422

Current Obligation: $40,776,663

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 4

Total Subaward Amount: $15,560,597

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q14OADU108

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline