Booz Allen Hamilton awarded $221.8M IT task order for computer systems design services by GSA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $221,791,088 ($221.8M)

Contractor: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2017-02-10

End Date: 2022-03-05

Contract Duration: 1,849 days

Daily Burn Rate: $120.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: IT

Official Description: AWARD OF JIDO ENTERPRISE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TASK ORDER. IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: MCLEAN, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 22102

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $221.8 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC for work described as: AWARD OF JIDO ENTERPRISE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TASK ORDER. IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Task order for computer systems design services falls under IT sector, a significant area of federal spending. 3. The contract duration of 1849 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. Awarded to a large, established contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, known for its extensive federal contracting history. 5. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type allows for performance-based incentives. 6. No small business set-aside was applied, indicating the primary award was not specifically targeted to small businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The award amount of $221.8 million over approximately five years for computer systems design services appears within a reasonable range for large-scale IT support contracts. Benchmarking against similar GSA IT task orders would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The CPAF structure allows for potential cost savings if performance targets are met, but also carries inherent risk if not managed tightly. Without specific performance metrics and comparison data, a definitive value assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This task order was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of two bidders (no. = 2) suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific task order. While competition is present, a higher number of bidders would typically lead to more aggressive pricing and potentially better value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple vendors to offer their best pricing and solutions, potentially driving down costs and improving service quality.

Public Impact

Federal agencies requiring advanced computer systems design and integration services benefit from this contract. The contract supports the modernization and efficiency of federal IT infrastructure. Work is likely performed in Virginia, where the contractor has a significant presence. This contract supports skilled IT professionals and potentially creates or sustains jobs in the technology sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contracts if performance incentives are not structured effectively.
Limited competition with only two bidders could mean less aggressive pricing than a more crowded field.
Long contract duration may reduce flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing technology needs without modification.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, ensuring a broad range of potential solutions were considered.
Contractor's established track record in federal IT services suggests a high likelihood of successful performance.
Performance-based incentives in CPAF structure can drive contractor efficiency and quality.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Information Technology (IT) sector, specifically Computer Systems Design Services. This is a critical area for federal agencies, encompassing the design, development, integration, and maintenance of complex IT systems. The federal IT market is substantial, with agencies consistently investing in upgrading infrastructure, cybersecurity, and digital services. This task order represents a portion of that broader investment, likely supporting specific enterprise-level IT initiatives.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor does it indicate any specific subcontracting goals for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the best solution from any qualified vendor, rather than specifically promoting small business participation. While large prime contractors often utilize small business subcontractors, the absence of explicit set-aside or subcontracting requirements in this data point means their involvement is not guaranteed or mandated by this award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the General Services Administration (GSA). The Cost Plus Award Fee structure implies performance monitoring against defined criteria to determine award fees. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General oversight may be involved if specific concerns regarding fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

GSA IT Schedule 70
Enterprise IT Services
Computer Systems Design
IT Professional Services
Federal Civilian IT Spending

Risk Flags

Potential for cost creep in CPAF contracts.
Limited competition may reduce price pressure.
Contract duration may not align with rapid tech evolution.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $221.8 million to BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON INC. AWARD OF JIDO ENTERPRISE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TASK ORDER. IGF::OT::IGF

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 $221.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-02-10. End: 2022-03-05.

What is Booz Allen Hamilton's track record with similar IT task orders from GSA?

Booz Allen Hamilton is a prolific federal contractor with a long history of securing and performing on large IT task orders, including those issued through GSA. They frequently win contracts for IT modernization, systems integration, cybersecurity, and management consulting across various civilian and defense agencies. Their extensive experience suggests a deep understanding of federal procurement processes and a proven capability to deliver complex IT solutions. However, like any large contractor, they have also faced scrutiny and past performance reviews on specific contracts, highlighting the importance of ongoing performance monitoring for each individual award.

How does the $221.8 million award compare to other GSA IT task orders for computer systems design?

The $221.8 million award for computer systems design services over approximately five years is a substantial but not unprecedented figure for large IT task orders issued by the General Services Administration (GSA). GSA manages numerous IT contracts, and awards in the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars are common for enterprise-level solutions, system integrations, and long-term support services. The value is influenced by factors such as the complexity of the systems, the scope of services, the duration of the contract, and the level of competition. Without specific details on the scope of 'computer systems design services' for this particular task order, a direct comparison to other awards is difficult, but it aligns with the upper range of significant IT investments made by federal agencies through GSA.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract of this magnitude?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract of this magnitude ($221.8 million) revolve around cost control and performance management. CPAF contracts allow the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a fee that is composed of a fixed base amount and an award amount determined by the government's evaluation of the contractor's performance against stated criteria. The risk for the government is that the contractor may not achieve the highest performance levels, leading to a lower award fee, or conversely, that costs could escalate beyond initial projections if performance metrics are not tightly defined or monitored. There's also a risk of 'fee chasing,' where contractors might focus on meeting award fee criteria rather than the most critical project needs. Effective oversight and clear, objective performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What is the historical spending trend for computer systems design services by GSA?

Historical spending by the General Services Administration (GSA) on computer systems design services has consistently been significant, reflecting the federal government's ongoing reliance on external expertise for its IT infrastructure. GSA, through its various IT schedules and contract vehicles, facilitates billions of dollars in IT procurements annually. Spending on services like system design, integration, and IT management has generally trended upwards over the past decade, driven by digital transformation initiatives, modernization efforts, and increasing cybersecurity needs. While specific year-over-year figures fluctuate based on agency priorities and budget allocations, the demand for these specialized IT services remains robust, making contracts like this task order a recurring feature of federal IT acquisition.

How does the number of bidders (2) impact the value proposition for taxpayers on this contract?

A limited number of bidders, such as the two identified for this task order, can have a mixed impact on the value proposition for taxpayers. On one hand, having at least two bidders indicates some level of competition, which is generally preferable to a sole-source award. This competition should theoretically drive prices down and encourage better service offerings compared to a scenario with no competition. However, with only two bidders, the competitive pressure might be less intense than if there were, for example, five or more. This could potentially lead to higher prices or less innovation than might be achieved in a more crowded marketplace. Therefore, while not ideal, two bidders represent a baseline level of competition that is better than none for ensuring taxpayer value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation

Address: 8283 GREENSBORO DR, MCLEAN, 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: $325,868,201

Exercised Options: $325,868,201

Current Obligation: $221,791,088

Actual Outlays: $-3,580

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 77

Total Subaward Amount: $27,601,282

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00Q09BGD0019

IDV Type: GWAC

Timeline