DoD's $26.4M construction contract for Afghan facilities awarded to a miscellaneous foreign entity

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,379,185 ($26.4M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-06-21

End Date: 2012-07-18

Contract Duration: 1,488 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ANP FOR BP CO. HQ ISLAMCHA KANDAHAR PROVINCE (4 SITES)

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.4 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: ANP FOR BP CO. HQ ISLAMCHA KANDAHAR PROVINCE (4 SITES) Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a foreign entity raises questions about value for money and oversight. 2. Limited information on competition dynamics and contractor track record. 3. Long duration of the contract (nearly 4 years) suggests potential for cost overruns or scope creep. 4. Fixed-price contract type offers some cost certainty but may limit flexibility. 5. Construction sector is prone to risks like material cost fluctuations and geopolitical instability. 6. Contracting in a conflict zone presents unique logistical and security challenges.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its unique context in Afghanistan and the awardee being a miscellaneous foreign entity. Without comparable projects or detailed cost breakdowns, it's difficult to assess if the $26.4 million represents a fair price for the construction services. The firm fixed-price nature provides some cost control, but the extended duration could still lead to unforeseen expenses.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were theoretically allowed to participate. However, the award to a 'miscellaneous foreign awardee' suggests that either few domestic or allied companies bid, or that the selection criteria favored this specific entity. The number of bidders is not specified, making it hard to gauge the true level of competition.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers, the outcome here, with a foreign awardee, warrants scrutiny to ensure the best value was indeed secured and that taxpayer funds were used efficiently.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the U.S. Department of Defense, which gains necessary infrastructure in a strategic location. Services delivered include the construction and maintenance of four sites, crucial for operational capabilities. Geographic impact is concentrated in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, supporting regional security efforts. Workforce implications would involve local labor for construction, potentially boosting the Afghan economy, alongside specialized foreign personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Award to a foreign entity may indicate limited domestic or allied contractor interest or capability.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess contractor reliability.
Contract duration of nearly four years increases exposure to geopolitical and economic risks in Afghanistan.
The nature of 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' can sometimes imply less stringent vetting or oversight compared to established domestic contractors.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type helps to cap costs and provides budget certainty.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting an attempt to solicit the widest possible range of offers.
The contract addresses a critical need for infrastructure in a challenging operational environment.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector. The market for construction services in conflict zones is highly specialized, often involving significant logistical, security, and political risks. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique operating environment and the specific nature of the infrastructure required by the Department of Defense in Afghanistan.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included small business set-asides. Given the nature of the work and the location, it is unlikely that significant subcontracting opportunities would have been directed towards U.S. small businesses. The focus appears to be on fulfilling a specific operational requirement rather than fostering small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for contracts in Afghanistan are typically robust, involving on-site representatives, quality assurance personnel, and potentially Inspector General (IG) investigations. However, the effectiveness of oversight can be challenged by the security situation and the distance from U.S. command structures. Transparency is often limited for operational security reasons in such environments.

Related Government Programs

Base and Facility Construction
Foreign Military Construction
Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
Afghanistan Reconstruction Contracts

Risk Flags

Awardee Nationality
Geographic Risk
Contract Duration
Lack of Performance Data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.4 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. ANP FOR BP CO. HQ ISLAMCHA KANDAHAR PROVINCE (4 SITES)

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 $26.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-06-21. End: 2012-07-18.

What is the track record of 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' in fulfilling similar construction contracts for the Department of Defense?

Information on the specific track record of 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES' as a category is not readily available in public databases. This designation often refers to entities that do not fit neatly into standard contractor classifications or may be foreign entities with less established public profiles. Assessing their past performance would likely require access to internal DoD contracting data, including past performance reviews, any disputes, or contract terminations. Without this, it's difficult to gauge their reliability and experience in executing large-scale construction projects, especially in complex environments like Afghanistan.

How does the per-square-foot construction cost of this contract compare to similar projects in Afghanistan or other operational theaters?

Determining a precise per-square-foot cost comparison is challenging without detailed specifications of the facilities constructed (e.g., type of buildings, materials used, site preparation requirements). Furthermore, construction costs in Afghanistan are significantly influenced by factors such as security premiums, transportation of materials, and the availability of local labor and resources, which can inflate prices compared to domestic projects. Contracts in operational theaters often carry higher costs due to these inherent risks and logistical complexities. A direct comparison to stateside construction would likely show a substantial premium for this contract.

What were the primary risks identified during the solicitation and award process for this contract, and how were they mitigated?

Key risks for a contract of this nature in Afghanistan would likely include geopolitical instability, security threats to personnel and assets, logistical challenges in material procurement and delivery, currency fluctuations, potential for corruption, and the availability of qualified local labor. Mitigation strategies might have involved robust security plans, detailed logistical support frameworks, fixed-price contract terms to manage cost volatility, and stringent oversight protocols. The specific risks identified and their mitigation plans would typically be documented in the contract's source selection decision document and risk management plan, which are often not publicly disclosed in full.

What is the overall effectiveness of using 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' for critical infrastructure projects in high-risk environments?

The effectiveness of using 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' is highly variable and depends on the specific entity, the nature of the project, and the oversight provided. While such awards can be necessary to fill capability gaps or access specialized local knowledge, they can also introduce complexities related to vetting, legal jurisdiction, and ensuring adherence to U.S. standards and ethical practices. For critical infrastructure, relying on less-established entities might increase risks if they lack proven experience or robust management systems. The Department of Defense must balance the need for timely execution with thorough due diligence and continuous monitoring to ensure effectiveness and accountability.

How has spending on construction contracts in Afghanistan evolved over the period this contract was active (2008-2012)?

The period of 2008-2012 was a significant phase of U.S. military operations and reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. Spending on construction contracts, including those for infrastructure, bases, and facilities, generally increased during this time as troop levels and operational tempo rose. This particular contract, awarded in 2008 and ending in 2012, falls within this peak period. Overall, billions of dollars were allocated annually to reconstruction and infrastructure development in Afghanistan, with a substantial portion going towards supporting military operations and security initiatives. The trend reflected a major commitment to establishing and maintaining a physical presence and operational capacity.

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: W917PM08R0071

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 08

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,880,265

Exercised Options: $26,379,185

Current Obligation: $26,379,185

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline