Dod's $15.1M Construction Contract for Ancop Patrol Kabul Awarded to Technologists Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,142,928 ($15.1M)

Contractor: Technologists Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-08-28

End Date: 2011-01-30

Contract Duration: 885 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ANCOP PATROL KABUL

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.1 million to TECHNOLOGISTS INC for work described as: ANCOP PATROL KABUL Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the fixed-price nature of the contract, though specific performance metrics are not detailed. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with a fixed-price contract potentially shifting some cost risk to the contractor. 4. Performance context is limited to construction services, with no clear indication of operational success. 5. This contract falls within the construction sector, supporting infrastructure development. 6. The duration of 885 days indicates a significant, long-term project.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $15.1 million for construction services in Afghanistan is substantial. Without comparable project data or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to control costs, but the ultimate value depends on the quality and timeliness of the delivered infrastructure. Benchmarking against similar international construction projects would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation.

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. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition for this project. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive prices towards market rates and encourage efficiency from the winning contractor.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that aims to secure the best possible price for the construction services required.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel and associated operations in Kabul, Afghanistan, through improved facilities. Services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction. The geographic impact is localized to Kabul, Afghanistan. Workforce implications would involve construction labor, potentially including both local and international workers.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Geopolitical instability in Afghanistan could pose risks to project timelines and execution.
Limited transparency on specific performance metrics makes it difficult to fully assess contractor performance.
Reliance on a single contractor for a large project increases dependency and potential for disruption.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type helps to establish cost certainty for the government.
The contract duration of 885 days suggests a commitment to completing a substantial project.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant part of the broader construction industry. The global construction market is vast, with government contracts forming a substantial segment. This specific project likely supports military or diplomatic infrastructure needs in a challenging operational environment. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale construction projects in similar geopolitical regions or for defense purposes.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides or significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The nature of large-scale international construction projects often favors larger, established firms with the capacity and experience to operate in complex environments. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any subcontracting plans were mandated or utilized.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of Defense's contracting officers and potentially Inspector General's office, especially given the location and value. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, with penalties for non-performance. Transparency is limited by the public availability of detailed performance reports, but contract award data is accessible.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
Foreign Military Sales Construction Support
Department of State Diplomatic Security Construction

Risk Flags

Geopolitical Risk
Performance Risk
Logistical Challenges

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.1 million to TECHNOLOGISTS INC. ANCOP PATROL KABUL

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TECHNOLOGISTS INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-08-28. End: 2011-01-30.

What was the track record of TECHNOLOGISTS INC. with similar government contracts prior to this award?

Prior to the ANCOP PATROL KABUL contract, TECHNOLOGISTS INC. likely had a history of government contracting, though specific details require database cross-referencing. Federal procurement data often reveals patterns of awards, contract types, and agencies served. For a company awarded a $15.1 million firm fixed-price contract for construction in Afghanistan, it suggests they possessed the necessary security clearances, international experience, and financial capacity to undertake such a project. A deeper dive would involve examining their past performance ratings, any past performance issues or disputes, and the scale and complexity of their previous projects to gauge their suitability and reliability for this specific undertaking.

How does the $15.1 million contract value compare to similar construction projects in Afghanistan or for the Department of Defense?

The $15.1 million contract value for construction in Afghanistan is significant, particularly for a single project. Comparing it to similar projects requires access to a database of construction contracts in that region or for similar military support functions. Projects of this scale often involve building or renovating significant facilities like barracks, command centers, or logistical hubs. Without specific comparable data points, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a high, low, or average cost. However, construction costs in conflict zones are typically higher than in stable regions due to increased logistical challenges, security requirements, and risk premiums. Therefore, $15.1 million could be considered within a reasonable range for a substantial infrastructure project under such conditions.

What were the primary risk indicators associated with this specific contract and contractor?

The primary risk indicators for this contract would include the inherent geopolitical instability of Afghanistan, which can lead to delays, security threats, and logistical hurdles. The nature of construction in a remote or challenging environment also presents risks related to material sourcing, labor availability, and quality control. For TECHNOLOGISTS INC., risks would depend on their prior experience in similar environments, their financial stability, and their capacity to manage complex international projects. The firm fixed-price contract type shifts some cost overrun risk to the contractor, but performance risk (delays, quality issues) remains. The number of bidders (3) suggests moderate competition, which could imply that fewer companies were willing or able to bid, potentially indicating higher perceived risks.

How effective was the competition level in ensuring a fair price for the government?

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition' with three bidders. While three bidders represent some level of competition, it is on the lower end of what is typically considered robust competition. A higher number of bidders (e.g., five or more) generally provides stronger assurance of price discovery and competitive pricing. However, for specialized or large-scale projects, especially those in challenging locations like Afghanistan, three bidders might be considered adequate if they were all qualified and capable. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract means the government agreed to a set price, and the competition's effectiveness lies in ensuring that this set price was reasonable based on the bids received. Without bid details, it's hard to definitively assess price fairness, but the competitive process itself is a positive indicator.

What are the historical spending patterns for ANCOP PATROL KABUL or similar construction projects in the region?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for 'ANCOP PATROL KABUL' specifically is difficult without more context on what 'ANCOP PATROL KABUL' refers to beyond the contract title. If it's a specific facility or project name, historical data might exist. Generally, for construction projects in Afghanistan supporting military or stabilization efforts, spending has been substantial over many years. The Department of Defense and other agencies have invested billions in infrastructure development, base construction, and facility upgrades. Spending patterns would likely show fluctuations based on operational needs, security situations, and funding appropriations. Comparing this $15.1 million contract to other similar-sized construction projects awarded by DoD in Afghanistan during the 2008-2011 period would provide a better benchmark for historical context.

What are the implications of the contract's duration (885 days) on project management and cost?

A duration of 885 days (approximately 2.4 years) for a $15.1 million construction project indicates a significant undertaking requiring long-term planning and resource allocation. For project management, this extended timeline necessitates robust oversight to ensure progress, quality, and adherence to the schedule. It also increases the potential for encountering unforeseen challenges, such as changes in security, environmental conditions, or material availability. From a cost perspective, a longer duration can sometimes lead to increased indirect costs (e.g., site management, overhead) for the contractor. However, for the government, a firm fixed-price contract helps to cap direct construction costs. The extended duration might also reflect the complexity of the construction, the need for phased development, or the challenging operating environment in Afghanistan, where project timelines are often subject to delays.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W917PM07R0105

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1700 N MOORE ST, ARLINGTON, VA, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Other Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $15,142,928

Exercised Options: $15,142,928

Current Obligation: $15,142,928

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W917PM07D0016

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline