HHS awards $34.4M contract for IT technical and functional services to Guidehouse Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,425,914 ($34.4M)

Contractor: Guidehouse Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2024-02-27

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 946 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IBAPS IT TECHNICAL AND FUNCTIONAL SERVICES; HFP MODULES DME, PM AS WELL AS O&M SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $34.4 million to GUIDEHOUSE INC. for work described as: IBAPS IT TECHNICAL AND FUNCTIONAL SERVICES; HFP MODULES DME, PM AS WELL AS O&M SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical Health and Human Services (HHS) IT functions, including Health Financials (HFP) modules. 2. The contract is structured as a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) award, providing cost certainty. 3. Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 4. Duration of nearly two years indicates a need for ongoing support. 5. The contract falls under Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services. 6. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the specific agency utilizing these services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $34.4 million over approximately two years appears reasonable for specialized IT technical and functional services. Benchmarking against similar contracts for IT support and module management within federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure helps manage cost overruns, but the specific pricing of individual tasks within the contract would be key to a detailed value analysis.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of multiple bidders, though not explicitly stated, is implied by this procurement method. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms and innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process as it is likely to result in a more favorable price for the services rendered compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

Beneficiaries include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) staff who rely on the supported IT systems. Services delivered encompass technical and functional support for Health Financials (HFP) modules, including DME, PM, and O&M. The geographic impact is primarily within the Department of Health and Human Services, with potential implications for its operational efficiency. Workforce implications may include the need for specialized IT personnel to manage and maintain these critical systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in if specific proprietary systems are heavily relied upon.
Ensuring adequate knowledge transfer and documentation for long-term maintainability.
Managing scope creep within a firm-fixed-price contract requires careful oversight.

Positive Signals

Award to an established firm (Guidehouse Inc.) suggests a degree of confidence in their capabilities.
Firm Fixed Price contract provides budget predictability.
Full and open competition indicates a robust selection process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader Information Technology (IT) services sector, specifically focusing on IT technical and functional support for administrative and financial systems. The market for such services is large and competitive, with numerous firms offering specialized expertise. This contract represents a portion of the federal government's ongoing investment in maintaining and modernizing its IT infrastructure to support critical public health functions.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting requirements for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears limited for this specific award. However, the prime contractor, Guidehouse Inc., may engage small businesses as subcontractors depending on their internal strategies and the specific needs of the contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Food and Drug Administration's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which ties payment to deliverables. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific performance metrics and detailed spending breakdowns may not always be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

HHS IT Modernization Initiatives
FDA Financial Management Systems
Federal Health IT Services
Administrative Management Consulting

Risk Flags

Potential for vendor lock-in
Ensuring knowledge transfer and long-term maintainability
Managing scope creep in FFP contracts

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $34.4 million to GUIDEHOUSE INC.. IBAPS IT TECHNICAL AND FUNCTIONAL SERVICES; HFP MODULES DME, PM AS WELL AS O&M SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GUIDEHOUSE INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (Food and Drug Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $34.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-02-27. End: 2026-09-30.

What is Guidehouse Inc.'s track record with the federal government, particularly with HHS and the FDA?

Guidehouse Inc. has a significant track record of federal contracting across various agencies, including HHS and its sub-agencies like the FDA. They often secure contracts related to management consulting, IT services, financial management, and program support. Their past performance with these agencies would have been a key factor in the evaluation process for this award. A review of federal procurement databases would reveal the extent and nature of their previous work, including contract values, performance ratings, and any past issues or successes. This history provides context for their ability to successfully execute the current contract.

How does the $34.4 million contract value compare to similar IT support contracts awarded by the FDA or HHS?

The $34.4 million contract value for approximately two years of IT technical and functional services is within a typical range for specialized support within large federal agencies like the FDA. Similar contracts for IT operations and maintenance (O&M), module support (like ERP or financial systems), and technical consulting often fall within this multi-million dollar bracket. However, a precise comparison requires analyzing contracts with similar scopes of work, service levels, and durations. Factors such as the complexity of the HFP modules, the number of users supported, and the specific technical requirements would influence the benchmark value. Without direct comparable contract data, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents exceptional value, but it aligns with general spending patterns for such services.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?

Key risks include potential technical challenges in supporting the HFP modules, the possibility of vendor lock-in if proprietary systems are involved, and ensuring effective knowledge transfer for long-term system maintainability. Scope creep is another risk, particularly within a firm-fixed-price contract, which could lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust technical oversight by the FDA, clearly defined service level agreements (SLAs), regular performance reviews, and strong contract management to control scope. The firm-fixed-price nature itself acts as a mitigation for cost uncertainty for the government, provided the scope is well-defined and managed.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type in ensuring program effectiveness and value for money in this context?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring value for money by shifting the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. For IT services like those described, where the scope of work can be clearly defined, FFP provides budget certainty for the government. This encourages the contractor to be efficient and manage costs effectively to maintain profitability. Program effectiveness is tied to the contractor's ability to meet the defined deliverables and performance standards. While FFP incentivizes cost control, it's crucial that the contract's performance work statement (PWS) is comprehensive and that the government actively monitors performance to ensure the required services are delivered effectively.

What are the historical spending patterns for IT technical and functional services at the FDA or HHS?

Historical spending patterns for IT technical and functional services at the FDA and HHS are substantial, reflecting the critical role of IT in supporting public health missions. Agencies like the FDA rely heavily on complex IT systems for regulatory processes, data analysis, and operational management. Spending in this category typically includes support for various software modules (financial, scientific, administrative), infrastructure maintenance, cybersecurity, and specialized IT consulting. Annual IT budgets for such agencies often run into hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, with a significant portion allocated to maintaining and enhancing existing systems and acquiring new capabilities. This $34.4 million award fits within this broader context of consistent federal investment in IT.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › IT AND TELECOM - APLLICATIONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Veritas Capital Fund Management, L.L.C.

Address: 1676 INTERNATIONAL DR STE 800, 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: $34,425,914

Exercised Options: $34,425,914

Current Obligation: $34,425,914

Actual Outlays: $26,485,182

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 3

Total Subaward Amount: $3,311,260

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00F045DA

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline