DoD's $138.8M Asia Vehicle Parts Contract: A Deep Dive into Management Consulting Services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $138,794,570 ($138.8M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-03-05

End Date: 2011-05-31

Contract Duration: 1,182 days

Daily Burn Rate: $117.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: {PIIN: W91B4M08C0009} RM ASIA VEHICLE PARTS

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $138.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: {PIIN: W91B4M08C0009} RM ASIA VEHICLE PARTS Key points: 1. The contract, awarded to 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES', suggests a broad network of suppliers for administrative and management consulting services. 2. With a duration of 1182 days, this contract represents a significant, long-term investment by the Department of the Army. 3. The 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' NAICS code indicates a focus on operational efficiency and strategic planning. 4. Awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION', the contract implies a robust bidding process aimed at securing the best value. 5. The 'DEFINITIVE CONTRACT' award type suggests a framework agreement for ongoing services rather than a single project. 6. The absence of specific small business set-aside flags warrants further investigation into subcontracting opportunities. 7. The contract's geographic focus on 'ASIA' points to specialized logistical and operational needs in that region. 8. The firm fixed-price structure aims to control costs and provide budget certainty for the Department of Defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to the broad 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' designation and the general nature of 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services'. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, it's difficult to assess if the $138.8 million expenditure represents optimal value for money. The firm fixed-price nature provides some cost control, but the effectiveness of the services rendered remains a key question. Comparing this to similar broad-scope consulting contracts in the Asia region would be necessary for a more precise valuation.

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 suggests a competitive environment designed to foster price discovery and ensure the government receives competitive pricing. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open competition model generally leads to a wider pool of potential contractors, theoretically driving down costs and improving service quality. This approach is typically favored for its potential to yield the best overall value.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is generally beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at competitive market rates, thereby maximizing the efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely Department of Defense operations and personnel in the Asia region, receiving support for administrative and management functions. Services delivered likely encompass strategic planning, operational efficiency improvements, and general management consulting tailored to the unique challenges of the Asian theater. The geographic impact is concentrated within the Asia region, supporting military and governmental functions in that area. Workforce implications could include the engagement of specialized consulting firms and potentially local expertise within Asia, contributing to regional employment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific contractor identification ('MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES') hinders performance tracking and accountability.
The broad scope of 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' makes it difficult to define and measure specific performance outcomes.
Potential for cost overruns if the scope of work expands beyond initial expectations, despite the fixed-price structure.
Geographic complexity in Asia may introduce logistical and cultural challenges impacting service delivery.
Limited transparency regarding the specific types of consulting services provided and their direct impact on mission objectives.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process aimed at achieving best value.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty and incentivizes contractor efficiency.
Long contract duration (over 3 years) indicates a stable, ongoing need for these services.
Focus on administrative and management consulting suggests efforts to improve operational efficiency within DoD's Asia operations.
The contract supports critical functions for the Department of the Army in a key strategic region.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically management consulting. The market for such services is vast and highly competitive, with numerous firms offering expertise in administrative and general management. The Department of Defense is a significant consumer of these services, often seeking specialized support for complex logistical, operational, and strategic challenges, particularly in diverse geographic regions like Asia. Benchmarks for similar large-scale consulting contracts within the defense sector would typically consider the scope of services, duration, and geographic complexity.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific requirement or focus for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the primary contractors are likely larger, established firms or a consortium of foreign entities. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans or goals, which could limit opportunities for small businesses to participate in this significant federal spending. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any subcontracting did occur or if there were specific efforts to engage small businesses indirectly.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army and the Department of Defense. As a definitive contract awarded under full and open competition, it is subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight mechanisms. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms of the firm fixed-price agreement and performance expectations, though the broad nature of the services may make detailed performance monitoring complex. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award itself, but detailed reporting on specific consulting activities and their outcomes may be limited. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Administrative Support Contracts
Asia Regional Support Services
Management and Consulting Services for Government Agencies
Foreign Military Support Contracts
Logistics and Operational Efficiency Consulting

Risk Flags

Lack of Specific Contractor Identification
Broad Service Scope
Potential for Reduced Competition Transparency
Geographic Complexity and Risk
Limited Performance Metrics Visibility

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $138.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. {PIIN: W91B4M08C0009} RM ASIA VEHICLE PARTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $138.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-03-05. End: 2011-05-31.

What specific types of administrative and management consulting services were provided under this contract?

The contract identifies the NAICS code as 'Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services' (541611). However, the specific deliverables and services rendered are not detailed in the provided data. This broad classification suggests services could range from strategic planning, organizational restructuring, process improvement, operational efficiency analysis, to general management advisory support tailored to the Department of the Army's operations in Asia. Without further documentation, the precise nature of the consulting work remains undefined, making it difficult to assess its direct impact or effectiveness.

How does the $138.8 million expenditure compare to similar consulting contracts for DoD operations in Asia?

Direct comparison is challenging due to the generalized nature of the award ('MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES') and the broad service category. However, $138.8 million over approximately three years (2008-2011) for comprehensive management consulting in a complex region like Asia is substantial. Similar contracts often involve detailed scopes of work, specific performance metrics, and clearly identified prime contractors. The lack of such specificity here makes a direct benchmark difficult. Generally, large-scale consulting engagements for defense in foreign theaters can range from tens to hundreds of millions, depending on the duration, scope, and criticality of the support required. This contract appears to be on the higher end for general administrative consulting.

What are the primary risks associated with a contract awarded to 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES'?

Awarding a contract to 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' presents several risks. Firstly, it obscures the identity of the actual service providers, hindering due diligence, performance monitoring, and accountability. It raises concerns about vetting and ensuring compliance with U.S. standards and regulations. Secondly, it can complicate communication and coordination, especially across different cultural and legal frameworks. Thirdly, it may increase the risk of fraud, waste, or abuse due to reduced transparency. Finally, it could potentially lead to less competitive pricing if the 'miscellaneous' category masks a lack of true competition or involves intermediaries inflating costs.

What was the historical spending pattern for similar administrative and management consulting services by the Department of the Army in Asia prior to this contract?

Analyzing historical spending patterns requires access to detailed procurement data beyond this single contract. However, it's reasonable to infer that the Department of the Army has consistently required administrative and management consulting services to support its global operations, including in the strategically important Asia region. Spending in this area typically fluctuates based on geopolitical conditions, operational tempo, and specific modernization or efficiency initiatives. A contract of this magnitude suggests a sustained need and potentially an increase in reliance on external expertise for managing complex regional operations, possibly driven by evolving security challenges or strategic realignments in Asia during that period.

How effective were the management consulting services in improving operational efficiency for DoD in Asia?

The effectiveness of the management consulting services provided under this contract cannot be determined from the given data. The contract's broad scope ('Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services') and the generalized awardee designation ('MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES') make it difficult to establish specific performance metrics or outcomes. To assess effectiveness, one would need access to performance reports, contractor evaluations, and potentially data demonstrating improvements in operational efficiency, cost savings, or strategic goal achievement directly attributable to the consulting services. Without such information, any assessment of effectiveness would be purely speculative.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MISCELLANEOUS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 22202

Business Categories: Category Business, Foreign Owned, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $143,841,493

Exercised Options: $143,841,493

Current Obligation: $138,794,570

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: SUPPLIES OR SERVICES PURSUANT TO FAR 12.102(F)

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Timeline