DoD's $38.5M Security Guard Contract with DynCorp International Faces Scrutiny for Lack of Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $38,545,250 ($38.5M)

Contractor: Dyncorp International LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-03-31

End Date: 2010-06-30

Contract Duration: 456 days

Daily Burn Rate: $84.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SECURITY GUARD FORCE

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WORTH, TARRANT County, TEXAS, 76177

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $38.5 million to DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC for work described as: SECURITY GUARD FORCE Key points: 1. The contract awarded to DynCorp International for security guard services represents a significant expenditure. 2. Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced value for taxpayer money. 3. The 'NOT COMPETED' status suggests a sole-source or limited competition scenario, impacting price discovery. 4. The security guard services sector is generally competitive, making the lack of bidding unusual.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $38.5M for security guard services needs further benchmarking against similar contracts. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to ascertain if the pricing reflects fair market value or if taxpayers are overpaying.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a limited or sole-source award. This significantly restricts price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs compared to a fully competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition likely results in a higher cost to taxpayers, as market forces that drive down prices were not engaged.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be paying more than necessary for essential security guard services due to the lack of competitive bidding. The decision not to compete this contract could set a precedent for future sole-source awards in the defense sector. Ensuring accountability for the justification of non-competitive awards is crucial for maintaining public trust.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Overpricing
Limited Transparency

Positive Signals

Essential Service Provided
Contract Awarded to Established Firm

Sector Analysis

The security guard services sector (NAICS 561612) is typically characterized by numerous providers, suggesting that competitive bidding should be feasible. This contract's non-competitive award warrants closer examination against industry norms.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business participation in this specific contract is not provided, but the lack of competition generally limits opportunities for small businesses to enter the market.

Oversight & Accountability

The justification for not competing this significant contract requires thorough review by oversight bodies to ensure adherence to procurement regulations and responsible use of funds.

Related Government Programs

Security Guards and Patrol Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Inflated Costs
Limited Transparency in Award Process
Questionable Value for Money
Insufficient Justification for Non-Competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $38.5 million to DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC. SECURITY GUARD FORCE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $38.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-03-31. End: 2010-06-30.

What was the specific justification for awarding this $38.5M security guard contract on a non-competitive basis, and did it align with federal procurement regulations for sole-source or limited compet

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED.' A comprehensive review would require access to the contract file to determine the specific justification cited, such as urgency, unique capabilities, or lack of available sources. Federal regulations permit non-competitive awards under specific circumstances, but these must be rigorously documented and justified to ensure fair and efficient use of taxpayer funds.

How does the cost of this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar security guard services, especially given the absence of competitive bidding?

Without competitive bids, establishing a precise cost benchmark is challenging. However, the 'br' value of 84529 (likely a benchmark or reference price) should be compared against the total contract value and duration. If this benchmark represents a fair market price, the lack of competition raises concerns about whether DynCorp International's pricing was optimized through market forces, potentially leading to higher costs for the government.

What measures were in place to ensure the effectiveness and quality of security guard services provided by DynCorp International under this non-competed contract?

Effectiveness and quality under a non-competed contract rely heavily on robust contract management and performance monitoring by the agency. The 'COST PLUS AWARD FEE' (CPAF) contract type suggests that performance incentives were intended to drive quality. However, the absence of competition means the initial selection was not based on a comparative evaluation of multiple offerors' proposed quality and cost.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Investigation and Security Services › Security Guards and Patrol Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. (UEI: 014784388)

Address: 13500 HERITAGE PKWY, FORT WORTH, TX, 76177

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,545,250

Exercised Options: $38,545,250

Current Obligation: $38,545,250

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline