DoD's $18.3M contract for management consulting services awarded to SI International Engineering Inc. shows potential value concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,569,801 ($11.6M)

Contractor: Serco Services Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-12-01

End Date: 2010-05-31

Contract Duration: 2,007 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (APPLIES TO AWARDS WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE ABOVE APPLY)

Sector: Other

Official Description: 200505!000366!5700!FA8601!88CONS/PK !GS23F8023H !C!N! !Y!FA860105F0005! !20041201!20051130!182993170!002308703!014387489!N!SI INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING I!1631 SOUTH MURRAY BLVD !COLORADO SPRIN !CO!80916!86660!057!39!WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB!GREENE !OHIO !+000001000000!N!N!000000000000!R799!OTHER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541611!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! ! ! !A! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! !Y!B!Y!N! ! ! ! ! ! !000! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: DAYTON, GREENE County, OHIO, 45433

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.6 million to SERCO SERVICES INC for work described as: 200505!000366!5700!FA8601!88CONS/PK !GS23F8023H !C!N! !Y!FA860105F0005! !20041201!20051130!182993170!002308703!014387489!N!SI INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING I!1631 SOUTH MURRAY BLVD !COLORADO SPRIN !CO!80916!86660!057!39!WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB!GREE… Key points: 1. The contract's value appears high relative to the services provided, warranting a closer look at pricing and efficiency. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process that should ideally lead to favorable pricing. 3. The contract duration of over 6 years raises questions about long-term necessity and potential for cost escalation. 4. Performance context is limited, making it difficult to assess the contractor's effectiveness and the overall success of the engagement. 5. The specific services, 'Other Management Support Services,' are broad and could encompass a wide range of activities, impacting value assessment. 6. Benchmarking against similar contracts for management consulting services is crucial to determine if the awarded price is reasonable.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The awarded amount of $18.3 million over a period of approximately 6.5 years suggests an average annual cost of roughly $2.8 million. Without specific details on the scope of work, deliverables, and the number of personnel involved, it is challenging to definitively benchmark this against similar contracts. However, for management consulting services, this figure could represent a significant investment. Further analysis would be needed to compare the hourly rates, total hours, and specific expertise provided against industry standards and other government contracts for comparable services to ascertain true value for money.

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 method is generally preferred as it fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and quality. The number of bidders is not specified in the provided data, but the use of full and open competition suggests that multiple entities likely vied for this contract. The level of competition is a key factor in determining price discovery and ensuring the government receives the best possible value.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices due to bidding wars among contractors. This process aims to ensure that public funds are used efficiently by selecting the most cost-effective solution.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary of this contract is the Department of Defense, specifically the Air Force, which receives management consulting support. The services delivered are categorized as 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services,' aimed at improving operational efficiency and strategic planning. The contract is associated with Wright Patterson AFB in Ohio, indicating a geographic focus for the service delivery. The contract likely supports a workforce within the Air Force by providing expertise that may not be readily available internally, potentially impacting civilian and military personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The broad nature of 'Other Management Support Services' could lead to scope creep and cost overruns if not tightly managed.
The extended duration of the contract (over 6 years) may indicate a lack of flexibility and potential for the services to become outdated or less relevant.
Without detailed performance metrics, it's difficult to assess if the contractor is delivering optimal value and meeting the Air Force's needs effectively.
The specific value for money is unclear without a detailed breakdown of services rendered and comparison to market rates for similar consulting engagements.

Positive Signals

The use of full and open competition suggests a robust process aimed at securing competitive pricing and quality.
The contract was awarded to SI International Engineering Inc., implying a selection based on their qualifications and proposed approach.
The contract is associated with a specific Air Force base (Wright Patterson AFB), indicating a targeted application of the consulting services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically management consulting. This sector is characterized by a wide range of firms offering expertise in areas such as strategy, operations, and human capital. The market size for government management consulting is substantial, with agencies frequently outsourcing specialized knowledge to improve efficiency and address complex challenges. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar management support services awarded to various federal agencies, considering factors like contract duration, scope, and contractor size.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically mandated for small businesses through a set-aside program for this particular award. The primary contractor, SI International Engineering Inc., would determine its own subcontracting strategy, which may or may not involve small businesses depending on their needs and capabilities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contract administration office at Wright Patterson Air Force Base. Performance monitoring, invoicing review, and compliance checks are standard oversight mechanisms. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms and conditions, including clauses related to performance standards and remedies for non-performance. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details, although detailed performance reports are often not publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Management and Technical Consulting Services
Professional Services
Administrative Support Services
Defense Agency Support Contracts
Air Force Operations Support

Risk Flags

Potential for high cost relative to service scope
Lack of detailed performance metrics in public data
Broad service category may obscure specific value delivered
Long contract duration could indicate inflexibility

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.6 million to SERCO SERVICES INC. 200505!000366!5700!FA8601!88CONS/PK !GS23F8023H !C!N! !Y!FA860105F0005! !20041201!20051130!182993170!002308703!014387489!N!SI INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING I!1631 SOUTH MURRAY BLVD !COLORADO SPRIN !CO!80916!86660!057!39!WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB!GREENE !OHIO !+000001000000!N!N!000000000000!R799!OTHER MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541611!E! !6! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SERCO SERVICES INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-12-01. End: 2010-05-31.

What specific management consulting services were rendered under this contract, and how were they aligned with the Air Force's strategic objectives at Wright Patterson AFB?

The contract data specifies the service category as 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' (NAICS 541611) and 'Other Management Support Services.' While the broad categories indicate support for general management and administrative functions, the precise nature of the services delivered is not detailed in the provided data. These could range from organizational efficiency studies, process improvement initiatives, strategic planning support, to administrative process optimization. To understand the alignment with strategic objectives, one would need to examine the specific Statement of Work (SOW) for the contract, which outlines the tasks, deliverables, and expected outcomes. Without the SOW, it's presumed the services were intended to enhance the operational effectiveness and administrative functions of the Air Force at Wright Patterson AFB.

How does the $18.3 million contract value compare to the typical cost of similar management consulting services procured by the Department of Defense over a 6.5-year period?

Benchmarking the $18.3 million contract value requires comparing it against similar contracts for management consulting services within the Department of Defense (DoD) or other federal agencies, considering the contract duration (approximately 6.5 years) and the scope of services. The average annual cost is roughly $2.8 million. Without specific details on the number of consultants, their labor rates, and the exact deliverables, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for management consulting, this annual figure could be considered substantial. A thorough analysis would involve querying contract databases for similar services (e.g., NAICS 541611) awarded over comparable periods, looking at total contract values, and adjusting for inflation and scope differences. If similar, less complex engagements were secured at significantly lower costs, it might indicate potential overpricing or scope inefficiencies in this contract.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the success of SI International Engineering Inc. under this contract, and how did they perform against these metrics?

The provided contract data does not include specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or performance evaluation reports for SI International Engineering Inc. Typically, government contracts include a Performance Work Statement (PWS) or Statement of Work (SOW) that outlines measurable performance standards and metrics. These might include timeliness of deliverables, quality of reports, effectiveness of recommendations, or client satisfaction. Without access to these documents or any associated performance assessments (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), it is impossible to evaluate the contractor's performance against defined metrics. The absence of this information limits the ability to assess the true value and effectiveness of the services provided.

What is the historical spending pattern for 'Other Management Support Services' at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, and does this contract represent a significant deviation?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for 'Other Management Support Services' at Wright Patterson Air Force Base requires accessing historical contract data over multiple fiscal years. This contract, valued at $18.3 million over approximately 6.5 years, represents a significant investment. To determine if it's a deviation, one would need to compare its total value and annual average against previous procurements for similar services at the base. If historical spending on such services has been considerably lower, or if this contract is substantially larger than previous ones, it could indicate an increased reliance on external consulting or a change in the scope of support required. Conversely, if similar large-scale contracts have been common, it might suggest a consistent need for such services.

Given the full and open competition, how many bids were received, and what was the range of proposed prices to understand the competitive landscape?

The provided data indicates that the contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' (ct: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION). However, the specific number of bids received and the range of proposed prices are not included in this dataset. Full and open competition is designed to encourage multiple bidders, which ideally leads to a competitive price discovery process. To fully assess the competitive landscape, one would need to consult the contract award file or relevant procurement databases that capture details such as the number of offers received and the pricing details of the competing proposals. Without this information, we can only infer that the process was intended to be competitive, but cannot quantify the extent of that competition or its impact on the final price.

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) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (APPLIES TO AWARDS WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE ABOVE APPLY) (2)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Serco Group PLC (UEI: 298452707)

Address: 12012 SUNSET HILLS RD, 8TH FL, RESTON, VA, 20190

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

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS23F8023H

IDV Type: FSS

Timeline