DoD's $21.6M Consulting Contract with Spry Methods Inc. Faces Scrutiny Over Value and Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,650,023 ($21.7M)

Contractor: Spry Methods, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-03-08

End Date: 2015-03-05

Contract Duration: 1,823 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: UK BUDGET AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: ARLINGTON, ARLINGTON County, VIRGINIA, 22209

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $21.7 million to SPRY METHODS, INC. for work described as: UK BUDGET AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Spry Methods Inc. for administrative management consulting services represents a significant investment. 2. Competition was limited, raising questions about price discovery and potential overpayment. 3. The fixed-price contract structure may mitigate some cost risks, but the lack of robust competition is a concern. 4. The sector is professional services, a common area for government contracting.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $21.6 million over five years for administrative management consulting is substantial. Without clear benchmarks or competitive pricing data, assessing its value for money is difficult. The fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope, but the lack of strong competition could have led to inflated pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' indicating a limited competitive environment. This method restricts the pool of potential bidders, potentially hindering effective price discovery and leading to less competitive pricing than a truly open competition might yield.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition raises concerns about whether taxpayers received the best possible value for the $21.6 million spent on these consulting services.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have overpaid due to limited competition in awarding a $21.6 million contract. The Department of Defense's reliance on specific contractors for administrative services warrants closer examination. The duration of the contract (5 years) suggests a long-term need, highlighting the importance of ensuring ongoing value.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional services sector, specifically administrative management and general management consulting. Government spending in this area is common, but often faces scrutiny regarding efficiency and cost-effectiveness, especially when competition is not robust.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. Further investigation would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract's award under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' suggests some level of oversight, but the limited nature of the competition itself raises questions about the thoroughness of the oversight process in ensuring optimal value for taxpayer funds.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

administrative-management-and-general-ma, department-of-defense, va, definitive-contract, 10m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $21.7 million to SPRY METHODS, INC.. UK BUDGET AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SPRY METHODS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $21.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-03-08. End: 2015-03-05.

What specific administrative management and general management consulting services were provided under this contract, and how were their effectiveness and impact measured?

The contract number and description indicate services related to 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services.' However, the provided data lacks specifics on the deliverables, performance metrics, or outcomes achieved. To assess effectiveness, a review of performance reports, client feedback, and any documented impact on the Department of the Navy's operations would be necessary. Without this, it's difficult to ascertain the true value derived from the $21.6 million expenditure.

Given the limited competition, what steps were taken to ensure the pricing was fair and reasonable, and what is the benchmark for similar services?

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which inherently limits competitive pressure. While a firm fixed price was established, the lack of broader competition makes it challenging to determine if the price was truly fair and reasonable. Benchmarking against similar contracts for comparable services, especially those awarded under full and open competition, would be crucial to assess potential overpricing. The data does not provide this comparative analysis.

What was the rationale for excluding other sources, and did this exclusion significantly impact the final contract price and overall value?

The specific rationale for excluding other sources is not detailed in the provided data. Typically, such exclusions might be based on unique capabilities, existing relationships, or specific program requirements. However, any exclusion inherently reduces competition. This limitation likely impacted the price discovery process, potentially leading to a higher cost for the government than if a wider range of qualified vendors had been allowed to compete. The overall value is therefore questionable without understanding the necessity of this exclusion.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesAdministrative 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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1555 WILSON BLVD STE 320, ARLINGTON, VA, 22209

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,145,574

Exercised Options: $25,811,958

Current Obligation: $21,650,023

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2010-03-08

Current End Date: 2015-03-05

Potential End Date: 2015-03-05 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2016-09-30

More Contracts from Spry Methods, Inc.

View all Spry Methods, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending