BGOV200 | Federal Industry Leaders 2015

Fiscal 2014 was a period of greater certainty and predictability for federal contractors. The disrupting factors of fiscal 2013, including sequestration, continued drawdowns in Iraq and Afghanistan, and fierce budget debates culminated in the December 2013 Ryan-Murray agreement, which allowed vendors to plan for future government spending –at least for two fiscal years, 2014 and 2015.

The fourth annual BGOV200 Federal Industry Leaders Study ranks the top 200 vendors by value of prime, unclassified contracts awarded by U.S. agencies in fiscal 2014. It analyzes the top contracts at 24 agencies and departments, and in 20 different purchasing categories. Click here for the list.

The BGOV200 explores the contracting dynamics of the past year and how contractors have fared and reacted. The study finds:

Total contracts in fiscal 2014 were $447.6 billion, down 3.1 percent from $462.1 billion in fiscal 2013. The share of total government obligation dollars won by the top 200 was 62 percent, which is a slight decrease from fiscal 2013’s 65 percent.

Contract awards won by 78 companies in the BGOV200 declined from 2013, including 5 of the top 10. The other 122 companies increased their government obligations despite the overall contracting decline.

One strategy used by successful contractors was moving into technology markets, including both services and equipment, or facility services, which experienced less budget pressure in fiscal 2014.

Multiple-award contracts (MACs) were a key to success for many vendors, as agencies continued their shift from single-award contracts to MACs. Agencies awarded several long-awaited mega-MACs and announced major contract consolidation initiatives.

Protected programs were less of a factor for successful contractors than in fiscal 2013, as spending on large programs such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter declined.

Mergers and acquisitions remained slow in the federal marketplace, but contractors continue to look for ways to expand in the public sector amid shrinking spending. Health information technology has been a significant area for federal acquisitions as companies compete for access to specific contracts.

Budgets Versus Contract Obligations

Inflation-adjusted dollars, in billions

Greater Certainty, Constrained Opportunity

While sequestration dominated almost all of fiscal 2013, the December 2013 Ryan-Murray budget agreement, named after its negotiators, Democratic Senator Patty Murray and Republican Representative Paul Ryan, eased $63 billion in automatic spending cuts by raising budget caps and set in motion the process that resulted in the enactment of a $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill in January 2014.

The bill set the base defense budget at $520.5 billion –not much more than the post-sequestration level of $518 billion in fiscal 2013. The nondefense budget totaled $491.8 billion, $27 billion more than fiscal 2013 post-sequestration levels. The 2014 budget for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), also known as “war funding,” was set at $91.9 billion — a slight decrease from the 2013 enacted amount of $98.7 billion. In some instances, the Department of Defense (DOD) used OCO funding to exceed the defense base budget funding cap set by the Budget Control Act because OCO funds aren’t subject to the cap. However, Congress limited what the DOD could get away with: It rejected a Pentagon request to pay for new Lockheed Martin Corp. (No. 1) F-35 fighter jets and Boeing Co. (No. 2) AH-64 Apache helicopters with OCO money.

While the overall federal budget increased in fiscal 2014 from 2013, contracting dollars declined by $14.5 billion, reflecting the shrinking defense budget, which peaked in 2010. The Defense Department has continued fighting to raise the budget caps on defense spending while at the same time adjusting to the reality of smaller budgets.

Some companies did better in the fiscal 2014 budget than they did the year before. General Dynamics Corp. (No. 3) and Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc.’s (No. 10) Virginia-class submarine, which was battered by sequestration, had significant increases: Congress added $950 million to President Barack Obama’s budget request, for a total of $6.2 billion. The money put on contract with General Dynamics for the submarines increased to $6 billion in fiscal 2014 from $3.2 billion in fiscal 2013.

Contractors faced fewer restrictions in 2014 because the omnibus allowed out-year planning and a level of certainty that permitted vendors to make investments. Having a full-year appropriations bill, rather than the continuing resolutions under which many agencies had been operating, allowed those agencies to issue new contracts and start new programs that had been shelved during the budget debates.

Markets Rebound — Sort Of

Nine of the 20 purchasing categories explored in the BGOV200 had more contract dollars in fiscal 2014, compared with only two with more money in 2013. Information technology had a successful year: Both technology services and technology equipment funding increased in 2014.

One of the most interesting narratives of 2014 includes aircraft, which was overtaken by technology equipment as the fifth-largest spending category. The aircraft market decreased by more than $11 billion from 2013 to 2014, but that trend is more symptomatic of the sometimes lumpy nature of federal spending than an actual decline in the aircraft market.

A 'Not For Flight' warning sticker sits on the side of an ejector seat, used in the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter jet, as it stands on display on the second day of the Farnborough International Airshow in Farnborough, U.K., on Tuesday, July 15, 2014. Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg

Most of the decrease was in obligations for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which dropped from $14.2 billion in fiscal 2013 to $4.4 billion in 2014. It comes as little surprise, then, that Lockheed Martin, the top federal contractor, saw its contract revenue decline by a similar amount, from $44.3 billion in 2013 to $32.5 billion in 2014.

This decrease has to do with the cyclical nature of federal spending. Aircraft was one of the few categories that increased obligations in fiscal 2013, in part due to a $3.4 billion F-35 production order signed in the final days of the fiscal year. Some of the decline in fiscal 2014 may also be due to the lingering effects of sequestration. Sequestration in 2013 particularly hurt large programs, and all of its impacts may not have been felt by programs until fiscal 2014.

Aircraft Market Falls, While Technology Spending Increases

Fiscal 2014 contract obligations, dollars in billions

The largest category increase was in facility-related services, which increased by $3.7 billion to $65.2 billion in fiscal 2014. This increase was primary concentrated at the departments of Defense and Energy. Many of the major contracts for running the Department of Energy’s (DOE) national laboratories were increased. In a rare industry upset, Consolidated Nuclear Security LLC (No. 48), a joint venture between Bechtel Group Inc. (No. 11), Lockheed Martin, Orbital ATK Inc. and SOC LLC, with Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp. (No. 12) as a teaming subcontractor, won the contract for operating the DOE’s Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee and the Pantex Plant in Texas. The facilities had previously been run by Babcock & Wilcox Inc. (No. 52), which fell 27 spots in the rankings this year.

Medical services, which had a $2 billion increase in 2014, helped UnitedHealth Group Inc.’s (No. 16) continued rise in the rankings. Ranked No. 129 just two years ago, the company has benefited from its management of the DOD’s TRICARE T3 Managed Care contract.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) spent around a billion more in fiscal 2014 on services to help Medicare providers improve care, primarily through contracts for Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs), directed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. In the first stages of an overhaul in 2014, two vendors won contracts to oversee QIO programs. Kepro Inc. and Livanta LLC, the two companies that won awards for the Beneficiary and Family Centered Care-QIO, each received more than $100 million in fiscal 2014 as part of the QIO overhaul.

Seeking opportunities in health care generally seemed to be a winning strategy in 2014. McKesson Corp. (No. 7), a pharmaceutical distribution company, increased its obligations by almost $1.5 billion, in part due to a $1.7 billion contract for delivery of mail-order pharmaceuticals to the DOD, a large increase outside of its traditional market, the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Medical services and technology services supporting health continue to be significant growth markets for federal contractors. The upswing in health spending is likely to continue as the DOD, VA and HHS ramp up health IT investments. The VA has had significant growth in its IT budget since fiscal 2009, and it requested $204 million more in IT investments for fiscal 2016 than it received the previous year, suggesting that this trend is not slowing anytime soon. Technology work related to Medicare, Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act is expected to continue to grow.

Elon Musk, chief executive officer of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), speaks at the unveiling of the Manned Dragon V2 Space Taxi in Hawthorne, California, U.S., on Thursday, May 29, 2014. The Dragon V2 manned space taxi, an upgraded version of the unmanned spacecraft Dragon, will be capable of sending a mix of cargo and up to seven crew members to the International Space Station. Photographer: Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg

After weathering a large decrease in 2013, space vehicle obligations rebounded in fiscal 2014, increasing by more than $600 million. United Launch Alliance LLC (No. 19), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Boeing, increased its obligations — and its BGOV200 ranking — through its Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, funded by the DOD. Obligations declined for the joint venture’s main competitor, Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), which dropped to No. 96.

Energy, HHS and State Increased Contract Spending

Fiscal 2014 contract obligations, dollars in billions

While the Army, Navy and Defense-wide agencies endured large spending cuts in fiscal 2014, a number of civilian agencies increased their contract spending. The departments of Energy, Health and Human Services and State all increased spending by a billion dollars or more. BL Harbert International LLC (No. 55) benefited from the State Department’s construction contracts for embassies in England, Chad and Kosovo. Harris Corp. (No. 29), which fell in BGOV’s rankings, was able to offset some of its loss by increasing its work at the Department of Commerce, supplying satellites and antenna systems.

Company Reactions

While continuing budget pressures made 2014 a challenging year for contractors, many were able to maintain or increase their contract totals by focusing on technology-related programs or concentrating on successful contract vehicles. In fact, more than half of the top 200 companies increased their contract revenue in 2014. However, the gains by the winners were less than the losses by the losers, as the overall market continued to decline.

The consistent year-over-year decline has made government buyers more cost-conscious, and they’ve increased efforts to obtain pricing data and consolidate contracts while pushing industry toward contraction. Consequently, vendors are using whatever advantages they have to make the most of a tough market.

For example, Alion Science & Technology Corp. (No. 63) was able to increase its contract revenue by $200 million on its expiring Information Analysis Centers (IAC) contract. The recent IAC recompete created MAC follow-ons, but Alion was able to load up on no-bid task orders on its expiring single-award contract, thus using a unique advantage to capture greater market share.

Information Technology

Together, obligations for technology services and technology equipment — representing a wide range of IT solutions — increased by $1.8 billion in 2014 as agencies focused on modernization, cloud, and agile development.

Booz Allen Hamilton, for example, helped boost its obligations by almost doubling its work on the VA’s Transformation Twenty-One Total Technology Program, known as T4. The program helps the VA acquire IT services to improve its IT capabilities. Accenture Plc (No. 50), which also grew its obligations in 2014, increased its work on T4 by stepping in to help save the flailing website.

Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg

Technology services work at the Department of Homeland Security helped Unisys Corp. (No. 121) increase its ranking and its obligations in fiscal 2014, particularly on the Alliant Large-Business MAC.

A major theme in federal IT was the public sector’s move into the cloud. Viewed as an innovative, cost-effective solution, cloud computing has gained momentum. Unlike vendors in other markets, however, large cloud companies such as Inc., Oracle Corp. and VMware Inc. don’t appear in the BGOV200 because their products are usually sold through value-added resellers, which take advantage of small-business set-asides.

Focusing on Multiple-Award Contracts

Multiple-award contracts were central to many major developments in fiscal 2014: The year was marked by continued contract consolidation, vigorous competition and small-business gains. Federal procurement through MACs totaled $115 billion in 2014, more than a quarter of all prime contract spending. While this represented a decline from fiscal 2013, the decrease was concentrated in the Department of Defense. Civilian agencies actually increased their MAC spending in fiscal 2014. In fact, MACs have accounted for a growing share of civilian contract dollars since fiscal 2007.

The top companies by MAC revenue in fiscal 2014 were Lockheed Martin, Booz Allen Hamilton and L-3 Communications Holding Corp. (No. 8) — and both Booz Allen and L-3 increased their 2014 contract dollars.

Of the top 15 MACs in fiscal 2014, 10 experienced growth, including Schedule 70, a General Services Administration schedule for IT products and services, and SeaPort Enhanced, the Navy’s MAC for procuring support services. International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) (No. 43) and Science Applications International Corp. (No. 14), the biggest winners on Schedule 70 and Seaport Enhanced, respectively, both increased their contract revenue and rankings in 2014. Among the top MAC contractors, IBM, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd. (No. 51) and CACI International Inc. (No. 25) rely the most on MACS, respectively receiving 81 percent, 80 percent and 79 percent of their total contract dollars from MACs in 2014.

MACs represent more than opportunities for large businesses. Small businesses won more than 40 percent of all MAC dollars in fiscal 2014, fueled mostly by the growth in spending on technology services and health IT.

Contractors can expect greater MAC consolidation as the government pushes to curb contract duplication and eliminate overlapping scopes. Civilian MAC spending will probably continue its upward trend, fueled by health IT spending — both VA and HHS are expected to rely heavily on MACS. Recent rules encourage the use of small-business set-asides on MACs, and small businesses will continue winning a substantial share of money on MACs. Finally, contractors can expect MACs to become larger, more flexible procurement vehicles as the traditional lines separating professional and technology services become increasingly blurred.

Mergers and Acquisitions

In fiscal 2014, companies appeared to continue the trend of spinoffs to increase efficiency, with little mergers and acquisitions activity as they waited for more certainty in the federal marketplace before making significant investments. Companies also continued to focus on increasing internal efficiencies to offset decreasing obligations.

The most significant development in 2014 was Exelis Inc.’s (No. 30) spinoff of Vectrus Inc. (No. 54). Exelis dropped in both contract revenue and BGOV’s rankings, mostly because a share of its contract dollars went with Vectrus.

One significant purchase during fiscal 2014 was Vencore Inc.’s acquisition of QinetiQ North American Inc. from QinetiQ Group Plc (No. 179), in order to gain access to QinetiQ’s services and solutions group.

After a slow 2014, fiscal 2015 has been marked by a series of high-profile mergers, suggesting a wave of restructuring as the federal market consolidates. In February, Alliant Techsystems Inc. (No. 35) completed the acquisition of Orbital Sciences Corp. (No. 69), renaming itself Orbital ATK Inc. and spinning off its sporting ammunition group to its shareholders. Also in February 2015, Engility Holdings Inc. (No. 60) completed its purchase of TASC Inc. (No. 147), increasing its systems engineering and advisory services capabilities. Also in February, Harris Corp. announced that it would acquire Exelis, a purchase that has the potential to double Harris’s federal contracting revenue. These significant acquisitions, all of which involved two vendors in the BGOV200, may be indicative of continued M&A activity in 2015 and into fiscal 2016.

Going Forward

After the upheaval of sequestration and a partial government shutdown, the Ryan-Murray budget agreement reached in December 2013 allowed a more normal budget process for fiscal 2014 and 2015. This continued certainty in funding was a relief to contractors after years of continuing resolutions. The fiscal 2015 budget included base funding of $522 billion for defense and $512 billion for nondefense, relatively stable numbers compared with 2014. However, total OCO funding dropped to $87 billion, a decrease of more than $10 billion from 2014, signifying that contractors will have to continue to adjust to flat federal budgets and potentially declining contract dollars.

Topline funding for 2016 is still unresolved. President Obama’s request exceeds the budget caps in law by $38 billion for defense and $33 billion for nondefense. The request indicates that IT and health are likely to continue driving opportunities in fiscal 2016. Most civilian agencies sought additional money for IT investments, and VA requested an overall budget increase.

U.S. President Barack Obama delivers remarks on his Fiscal Year 2016 Budget at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Feb. 2, 2015. Photographer: Kristoffer Tripplaar/Pool via Bloomberg

The fiscal 2016 budget blueprint approved by the House and Senate would maintain the caps, while allowing additional OCO money that appropriators could use to pay for expenses that are traditionally considered “base” needs — an approach that has drawn White House veto threats.

While stakeholders may continue to debate spending on specific programs, contractors can use budget information to project future government spending. The spending caps that have dominated budget debates have had an unintended consequence for federal contractors: The caps, instead of setting a ceiling amount as the drafters intended, have effectively set the minimum amount of discretionary government spending.

Eric Chalmers, staff assistant with the Senate Budget Committee, gestures while talking to a staff member behind copies of U.S. President Barack Obama's Fiscal Year 2016 Budget arranged on a table at the Senate Budget Committee hearing room in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Monday, Feb. 2, 2015. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg

Fiscal 2014 may have represented the dawn of a new normal in the federal marketplace: contract spending was down following the drawdown in Afghanistan and Iraq, but greater budget certainties allowed greater planning and projections. This means that the marketplace is becoming increasingly competitive, but contractors who are able to connect the strategic with the tactical will continue to thrive.


Rank Company Contracts Prior-year rank
1 Lockheed Martin Corp. $32.5 billion 1
2 Boeing Co. $18.5 2
3 General Dynamics Corp. $15.5 3
4 Raytheon Co. $12.6 4
5 Northrop Grumman Corp. $10.6 5
6 United Technologies Corp. $6.6 7
7 McKesson Corp. $6.2 10
8 L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. $5.7 8
9 BAE Systems Plc $5.1 9
10 Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. $4.7 6
11 Bechtel Group Inc. $4.5 11
12 Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp. $3.8 16
13 Humana Inc. $3.6 14
14 Science Applications International Corp. $3.5 12
15 Health Net Inc. $3.2 17
16 UnitedHealth Group Inc. $3.2 43
17 AECOM $3.0 77
18 Hewlett-Packard Co. $2.9 19
19 United Launch Alliance LLC $2.9 39
20 Computer Sciences Corp. $2.6 18
21 General Electric Co. $2.5 22
22 Los Alamos National Security LLC $2.3 32
23 Leidos Holdings Inc. $2.2 23
24 Battelle Memorial Institute $2.1 29
25 CACI International Inc. $2.1 30
26 Bell Boeing Joint Project Office $2.0 31
27 Textron Inc. $2.0 20
28 Honeywell International Inc. $2.0 33
29 Harris Corp. $1.9 27
30 Exelis Inc. $1.9 15
31 California Institute of Technology $1.7 36
32 General Atomics Technologies Corp. $1.7 28
33 Royal Dutch Shell Plc $1.6 122
34 DynCorp International Inc. $1.6 13
35 Alliant Techsystems Inc. $1.6 40
36 AmerisourceBergen Corp. $1.5 41
37 Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. $1.5 37
38 Johns Hopkins University $1.5 49
39 Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC $1.5 44
40 Pacific Architects & Engineers Inc. $1.4 58
41 Merck & Co Inc. $1.4 45
42 University of California $1.4 55
43 International Business Machines Corp. $1.4 51
44 UT-Battelle LLC $1.3 52
45 Fluor Corp. $1.3 26
46 MITRE Corp. $1.3 54
47 Cardinal Health Inc. $1.3 50
48 Consolidated Nuclear Security LLC $1.3 NR
49 Valero Energy Corp. $1.2 88
50 Accenture Plc $1.2 61
51 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd. $1.1 56
52 Babcock & Wilcox Co. $1.1 25
53 SRA International Inc. $1.1 57
54 Vectrus Inc. $1.1 NR
55 BL Harbert International LLC $1.1 135
56 ADS Inc. $1.0 62
57 Massachusetts Institute of Technology $1.0 74
58 Anham FZCO $985.9 million NR
59 ManTech International Corp. $971.9 47
60 Engility Holdings Inc. $956.8 42
61 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC $940.9 65
62 Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc $902.3 76
63 Alion Science & Technology Corp. $893.2 85
64 Exxon Mobil Corp. $879.1 121
65 Rockwell Collins Inc. $878.9 73
66 Finmeccanica SpA $874.1 68
67 CGI Group Inc. $869.6 63
68 Pfizer Inc. $862.6 60
69 Orbital Sciences Corp. $861.3 138
70 Foster Fuels Inc. $859.9 NR
71 Verizon Communications Inc. $809.0 99
72 CH2M Hill Cos. $807.3 82
73 Sierra Nevada Corp. $805.5 38
74 FedEx Corp. $804.3 69
75 Arctic Slope Regional Corp. $793.3 113
76 GlaxoSmithKline Plc $786.0 70
77 Aerospace Corp. $781.4 72
78 Dell Inc. $777.4 64
79 Austal Ltd. $770.8 66
80 AP Moeller – Maersk A/S $755.6 59
81 Blue Cross & Blue Shield Association $733.6 90
82 Parsons Corp. $717.5 93
83 Express Scripts Holding Co. $711.8 102
84 Serco Group Plc $711.5 83
85 Nana Regional Corp Inc. $707.5 110
86 UChicago Argonne LLC $692.3 80
87 Wyle Inc. $688.3 81
88 Coins ‘N Things Inc. $672.3 46
89 Sanofi $657.5 91
90 Bahrain Petroleum Co. $636.1 115
91 CDW Corp. $634.8 145
92 Sunshine Minting Inc. $629.3 71
93 Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. NV $626.6 79
94 World Fuel Services Corp. $620.9 53
95 AT&T Inc. $599.9 94
96 Space Exploration Technologies Corp. $587.4 78
97 Mina Group $584.0 NR
98 Brookhaven Science Associates LLC $581.6 103
99 Oshkosh Corp. $566.4 35
100 Hensel Phelps Kiewit Joint Venture $559.8 NR
101 Iron Bow Holdings Inc. $549.6 141
102 Washington River Protection Solutions LLC $527.4 125
103 National Security Technologies LLC $516.9 116
104 Canadian Commercial Corp. $515.1 104
105 S-Oil Corp. $501.8 101
106 Tetra Tech Inc. $492.2 112
107 Afognak Native Corp. $491.0 124
108 Caddell Construction Co. $490.7 92
109 Chemonics International Inc. $488.9 136
110 Patriot Team $483.7 95
111 Mythics Inc. $479.9 165
112 Constellis Holdings LLC $467.7 183
113 G4S Plc $460.4 146
114 Interpublic Group of Companies Inc. $459.4 120
115 Supreme Group BV $454.8 21
116 Stanford University $453.9 134
117 Johnson Controls Inc. $451.3 176
118 Red River Computer Co. $445.2 181
119 Chenega Corp. $441.5 167
120 Charles Stark Draper Laboratory Inc. $440.2 130
121 Unisys Corp. $437.4 144
122 Westat Inc. $430.1 139
123 Geo Group Inc. $429.3 114
124 Fermi Research Alliance LLC $427.8 148
125 Cubic Corp. $425.3 132
126 Ford Motor Co. $421.3 169
127 Al-Raha Group for Technical Services $420.7 153
128 Carahsoft Technology Corp. $420.3 161
129 Corrections Corp. of America $413.0 109
130 South Carolina Research Authority $412.1 NR
131 Airbus Group NV $407.6 117
132 Chevron Corp. $405.6 86
133 Day & Zimmermann Group Inc. $401.3 NR
134 U.S. Department of Energy $395.5 87
135 SGT Inc. $391.4 149
136 Spectrum Group International Inc. $391.0 97
137 Partnership For Supply Chain Management Inc. $389.2 98
138 Chugach Alaska Corp. $384.8 137
139 ICF International Inc. $382.0 152
140 Altegrity Holding Corp. $379.5 128
141 immixGroup Inc. $377.2 158
142 Bristol Bay Native Corp. $363.2 163
143 Siemens AG $362.7 131
144 Hensel Phelps Construction Co. $362.4 NR
145 Redstone Defense Systems $361.3 171
146 Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Corp. $361.3 100
147 TASC Inc. $360.5 156
148 World Wide Technology Holding Co. $356.3 164
149 Research Triangle Institute $353.9 160
150 Gilbane Inc. $352.0 179
151 DLT Solutions Inc. $351.2 177
152 General Motors Co. $344.4 NR
153 Alliance for Sustainable Energy LLC $344.1 154
154 MetLife Inc. $343.6 162
155 Koninklijke Philips NV $343.5 157
156 Martin’s Point Health Care Inc. $342.6 173
157 NCI Inc. $341.1 178
158 Tyson Foods Inc. $334.9 143
159 Ball Corp. $332.6 NR
160 Akal Security Inc. $332.5 126
161 Securitas AB $331.4 172
162 Aegis Defence Services Ltd. $327.2 195
163 Anthem Inc. $327.1 NR
164 Western Refining Inc. $325.3 NR
165 Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. $321.7 133
166 AAR Corp. $316.2 118
167 MAXIMUS Inc. $316.2 NR
168 Russian Space Agency $312.3 175
169 Vesuvius Plc $308.2 111
170 Oak Ridge Associated Universities Inc. $306.8 174
171 CH2M-WG Idaho LLC $306.5 NR
172 Kongsberg Gruppen ASA $301.9 NR
173 Sodexo SA $301.9 182
174 ActioNet Inc. $296.7 189
175 Management & Training Corp. $290.8 142
176 Washington Closure Hanford LLC $290.0 184
177 Systems Made Simple Inc. $289.1 NR
178 EMCOR Group Inc. $285.2 190
179 QinetiQ Group Plc $282.7 129
180 John Snow Inc. $281.1 151
181 Bollinger Shipyards Inc. $280.6 199
182 Emergent Biosolutions Inc. $280.4 NR
183 Mission Support Alliance LLC $278.5 NR
184 Intuitive Research & Technology Corp. $276.3 191
185 KBR Inc. $274.3 140
186 Goodwill Industries International Inc. $273.7 NR
187 Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV $273.6 NR
188 Phillips 66 $272.5 NR
189 Abt Associates Inc. $270.9 187
190 Digital Management Inc. $269.1 NR
191 Insight Enterprises Inc. $268.2 NR
192 Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc. $267.0 NR
193 J&J Maintenance Inc. $265.8 196
194 Danaher Corp. $264.4 NR
195 Raytheon Lockheed Martin Javelin JV $263.9 NR
196 Reed Elsevier Plc $262.6 NR
197 Aerospace Testing Alliance $260.3 193
198 FCN Inc. $260.2 NR
199 Mission Essential Personnel LLC $258.3 105
200 Neptune Orient Lines Ltd. $257.8 168

Note: While AECOM acquired URS Corp. on Oct. 17, 2014, after the end of fiscal 2014, the combined company is listed on the BGOV200.

About the Analysts
Duncan Amos is a quantitative analyst with Bloomberg Government. Previously, he was a quantitative research assistant at the RAND Corporation, where he focused on defense, mobility, finance and international development research. He has a master’s degree in applied economics from Johns Hopkins University, and bachelor’s degrees in political science and economics from Duke University.

Timothy Yeaney is a senior data analyst with Bloomberg Government. Before joining Bloomberg, he spent more than 20 years as vice president of Eagle Eye Publishers, where he developed comprehensive data mining and analytical tools for evaluating federal prime contracts and other spending data. He was the chief architect of the precursor to the website application and supplied the contracts and grants data for the site during its rollout. Tim received his A.B. from Occidental College.

To contact the analysts: Duncan Amos in Washington at; Timothy Yeaney in Washington at To contact the director of government sales research: Kevin Brancato at; Jodie Morris at

Want to learn more?

Let one of our specialists guide you in a personalized tour of Bloomberg Government’s powerful tools and exclusive features.