DoD's $20.9M construction contract for Camp Zafar shows fair competition but lacks transparency on awardee

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,883,723 ($20.9M)

Contractor: Foreign Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-01-19

End Date: 2014-06-02

Contract Duration: 499 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 13

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ANA CSB AT CAMP ZAFAR

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.9 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: ANA CSB AT CAMP ZAFAR Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating a broad market search. 2. A high number of bids (13) suggests significant interest and potential for competitive pricing. 3. The firm fixed-price contract type generally transfers risk to the contractor, aiding cost certainty. 4. The contract duration of 499 days is substantial for a construction project of this scale. 5. Lack of disclosed awardee details raises concerns about transparency and accountability. 6. The project's location in Afghanistan highlights geopolitical complexities and potential logistical challenges.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking construction costs in active operational zones is challenging due to unique logistical and security premiums. While the contract was competitively bid, the lack of specific awardee information prevents a detailed comparison of pricing against similar projects or market rates. The firm fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to control costs, but without knowing the specific scope and the winning bid's relation to the estimated value, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult. The total award amount of approximately $20.9 million is significant for a single construction project in a complex environment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 13 bidders indicates a healthy level of interest in this contract, which is a positive sign for price discovery. A larger number of bidders typically exerts downward pressure on prices, suggesting that the government likely received competitive offers. However, the specific details of the bidding process and the winning proposal are not publicly available.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition suggests that taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently by allowing a wide range of contractors to compete, potentially leading to better pricing than a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. military personnel stationed at Camp Zafar, who would gain improved facilities. The contract delivered essential construction services, likely including the building or upgrading of infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to Camp Zafar, Afghanistan, supporting military operations in that region. Workforce implications would include construction jobs for both local and potentially international labor, depending on the contractor's sourcing.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of transparency regarding the specific awardee and their qualifications.
Potential for cost overruns or delays due to the challenging operational environment in Afghanistan.
Difficulty in verifying the value for money without detailed performance and pricing data.
Limited insight into subcontracting opportunities for small businesses.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, maximizing potential bidder pool.
Firm fixed-price contract type, which generally provides cost certainty.
A significant number of bids (13) indicates strong market interest.
Contract aimed at improving critical infrastructure for military operations.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically for institutional and commercial buildings. The Department of Defense is a major client for construction services, particularly in support of overseas operations. The market for such services in conflict zones is specialized, often involving higher risk premiums and logistical complexities compared to domestic projects. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish precisely due to the unique geopolitical context and the specific requirements of military installations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically mandated for small businesses through a set-aside. The primary contractor, being an 'FOREIGN AWARDEE (UNDISCLOSED)', suggests that opportunities for U.S. small businesses would likely depend on the prime contractor's own subcontracting strategy, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and inspection mechanisms. Given the location, oversight would likely involve a combination of on-site military personnel, contracting officers, and potentially Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) involvement. Transparency is limited by the undisclosed awardee. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply, but specific reports related to this contract are not readily available without further investigation.

Related Government Programs

Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) Construction
Military Construction (MILCON)
Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Support
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Construction

Risk Flags

Lack of Awardee Transparency
Geopolitical Risk
Logistical Complexity
Potential for Cost Overruns
Limited Public Oversight Data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.9 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). ANA CSB AT CAMP ZAFAR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-01-19. End: 2014-06-02.

What specific construction services were delivered under this contract?

The contract description 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' (nd) suggests the project involved the building or renovation of facilities intended for use by personnel or for institutional purposes within Camp Zafar. This could encompass a range of structures such as barracks, administrative buildings, workshops, or support facilities. Without more specific details on the Statement of Work (SOW) or project scope, the exact nature of the construction remains generalized. The duration of 499 days implies a project of considerable scale and complexity, likely involving significant structural work, utilities, and finishing.

How does the $20.9 million award compare to similar construction projects in Afghanistan for the DoD?

Directly comparing this $20.9 million contract to similar projects in Afghanistan is challenging due to the scarcity of publicly available, granular data on construction contracts in active operational zones. Factors such as specific location, security requirements, logistical costs, and the exact scope of work (e.g., new build vs. renovation, type of facility) can cause significant price variations. However, for major construction efforts in similar environments, award amounts in the tens of millions are not uncommon, reflecting the inherent costs and risks associated with operating in such regions. The firm fixed-price nature and the number of bidders (13) suggest a competitive process was attempted, which is a positive indicator for value, but without detailed cost breakdowns or performance reports, a precise benchmark is elusive.

What are the primary risks associated with a construction contract of this nature in Afghanistan?

Construction contracts in Afghanistan, particularly for military installations, carry significant risks. These include security risks to personnel and equipment, logistical challenges in transporting materials and personnel, potential for political instability impacting project continuity, and the risk of unforeseen site conditions. Furthermore, currency fluctuations and the availability of skilled labor can pose economic risks. The firm fixed-price contract type, while aiming to control costs, can expose the contractor to greater financial risk if unforeseen issues lead to cost overruns. The 'FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' aspect adds a layer of uncertainty regarding the contractor's experience and reliability in such a high-risk environment.

What does the 'FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' designation imply for accountability and oversight?

The 'FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED)' designation significantly hampers accountability and oversight. It prevents the public, and potentially even other government agencies, from easily identifying the specific entity responsible for executing the contract. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to assess the contractor's past performance, financial stability, or adherence to ethical standards. While the Department of Defense undoubtedly has internal mechanisms to vet and manage foreign contractors, the public disclosure aspect is crucial for broader accountability. It raises questions about why the awardee's identity is withheld and whether this is standard practice or specific to this contract, potentially obscuring scrutiny.

How has DoD spending on construction in Afghanistan trended over the years, and where does this contract fit?

DoD spending on construction in Afghanistan has historically been substantial, particularly during periods of heightened military presence and operational tempo (e.g., 2001-2014). Contracts ranged from small facility upgrades to massive base construction projects. This $20.9 million contract, awarded in 2013 and ending in 2014, falls within a period where significant infrastructure development was still occurring, albeit potentially shifting towards consolidation or specific operational needs as the U.S. presence evolved. While specific annual spending figures fluctuate based on strategic priorities and troop levels, contracts of this magnitude were typical for supporting ongoing military operations and maintaining facilities in the region during that era.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W5J9LE13R0009

Offers Received: 13

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,883,723

Exercised Options: $20,883,723

Current Obligation: $20,883,723

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline