DoD's $29.7M contract for substation services in Iraq awarded to a foreign entity

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,681,420 ($29.7M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-07

End Date: 2008-05-02

Contract Duration: 603 days

Daily Burn Rate: $49.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: {PIIN: W91GXY06C0096} DIWANIYA, NASIRIYA AND SHATRA SUBSTATIONS

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.7 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: {PIIN: W91GXY06C0096} DIWANIYA, NASIRIYA AND SHATRA SUBSTATIONS Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a foreign entity, raising questions about domestic economic benefit. 2. Services provided under Administrative Management and General Management Consulting. 3. Contract duration of 603 days suggests a significant, albeit short-term, operational need. 4. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but actual value depends on performance. 5. Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a broad search for qualified bidders. 6. The contract's focus on substations implies critical infrastructure support in a challenging environment.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its specific foreign operational context and the nature of administrative management services. The total award amount of $29.7 million over approximately 20 months suggests a substantial investment. Without comparable domestic projects or detailed performance metrics, assessing the precise value-for-money is difficult. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract provides some cost certainty for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders were solicited and considered. This approach is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation implies a robust competitive process was intended.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process aims to secure the best possible pricing and services for taxpayers by leveraging market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Defense and its operational units in Iraq, receiving essential support for critical infrastructure. Services delivered include administrative management and general management consulting, crucial for the functioning of substations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Diwaniya, Nasiriya, and Shatra, Iraq, highlighting the contract's role in supporting specific regional operations. Workforce implications are primarily for the awarded contractor, a miscellaneous foreign awardee, rather than U.S. domestic employment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Award to a foreign entity may limit direct economic benefits to U.S. small businesses.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess efficiency and effectiveness.
Geopolitical risks inherent in operating in Iraq could impact contract execution and costs.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a structured procurement process aimed at achieving best value.
Fixed-price contract type provides cost predictability for the government.
The contract addresses a critical infrastructure need, supporting essential military operations.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the professional, scientific, and technical services sector, specifically administrative and management consulting. The market for such services is vast, but this particular award is highly specialized due to its geographic location and focus on critical infrastructure support in a military operational zone. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish given the unique context.

Small Business Impact

The contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, the awardee is listed as 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES,' suggesting that subcontracting opportunities for U.S. small businesses are unlikely to be a primary focus or requirement of this specific contract. The impact on the small business ecosystem is therefore minimal.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management structures. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, but detailed performance reporting and Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on specific contract clauses and ongoing oversight activities.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Infrastructure Support Contracts
Foreign Military Support Services
Administrative and Management Consulting Services
Iraq Reconstruction and Stabilization Efforts

Risk Flags

Foreign Awardee
Operational Environment Risk
Infrastructure Support

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.7 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. {PIIN: W91GXY06C0096} DIWANIYA, NASIRIYA AND SHATRA SUBSTATIONS

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 $29.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-07. End: 2008-05-02.

What was the specific nature of the administrative management and general management consulting services provided for the Diwaniya, Nasiriya, and Shatra substations?

The contract PIIN W91GXY06C0096, awarded by the Department of the Army, involved administrative management and general management consulting services (NAICS code 541611) related to substations in Diwaniya, Nasiriya, and Shatra, Iraq. While the specific details of the consulting services are not fully elaborated in the provided data, such contracts typically encompass project management, logistical support, operational planning, and potentially oversight of local contractors or personnel involved in the maintenance and functioning of these electrical substations. The goal would be to ensure the efficient and effective operation of these critical infrastructure components within a complex operational environment.

How did the 'full and open competition' process for this contract ensure competitive pricing and identify the best value for the government?

A 'full and open competition' process, as indicated for contract W91GXY06C0096, mandates that the government solicits offers from all eligible responsible sources and that all responsible sources are permitted to compete. This typically involves publishing a solicitation on a public platform like SAM.gov, allowing any qualified vendor, regardless of prior relationship with the agency, to submit a proposal. The process is designed to foster a competitive environment where multiple companies vie for the contract, theoretically driving down prices and encouraging innovative solutions. The agency then evaluates proposals based on pre-defined criteria (e.g., technical approach, past performance, price) to select the offer that represents the best overall value to the government, not necessarily the lowest price alone.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a contract of this nature to a 'miscellaneous foreign awardee' operating in Iraq?

Awarding a contract like W91GXY06C0096 to a 'miscellaneous foreign awardee' in Iraq presents several potential risks. Firstly, there are geopolitical and security risks inherent in operating in that region, which could lead to disruptions, increased security costs, or necessitate contract modifications. Secondly, oversight and enforcement of contract terms might be more complex compared to dealing with a domestic U.S. contractor, potentially involving different legal frameworks and logistical challenges. Thirdly, there could be concerns regarding the transfer of funds and ensuring compliance with international regulations. Finally, the lack of direct U.S. domestic economic benefit, such as job creation or small business subcontracting, is a strategic consideration, although the primary driver for such an award would be operational necessity and capability.

Given the fixed-price contract type, how is contractor performance and quality assurance managed for services rendered in a remote, potentially challenging environment?

For a fixed-price contract like W91GXY06C0096, contractor performance and quality assurance are typically managed through rigorous contract administration and oversight, even in remote environments. The government establishes clear performance standards, deliverables, and acceptance criteria within the contract. Contracting officers' representatives (CORs) or other designated personnel are responsible for monitoring the contractor's progress, verifying that services meet the required quality standards, and ensuring compliance with contract terms. While the fixed price provides cost certainty, the government still needs to actively manage performance to ensure the intended outcomes are achieved. This might involve site visits, regular progress reports, performance evaluations, and potentially withholding payment if performance is deficient, despite the fixed-price nature.

How does this $29.7 million contract compare to other U.S. government spending on administrative and management consulting services, particularly in overseas operational contexts?

The $29.7 million award for administrative and management consulting services (NAICS 541611) for substations in Iraq represents a significant, but likely niche, expenditure within the broader landscape of U.S. government consulting contracts. The government spends billions annually on consulting services across various sectors. However, contracts of this size focused on supporting critical infrastructure in active operational zones like Iraq are distinct from typical domestic consulting engagements. Benchmarking requires comparing it to similar contracts supporting military operations or reconstruction efforts in comparable regions. While substantial for its specific purpose, it is a fraction of the overall defense budget or the total federal spending on consulting, which often includes large-scale IT, strategic planning, and R&D advisory services.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: MISCELLANEOUS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

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: $29,681,420

Exercised Options: $29,681,420

Current Obligation: $29,681,420

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Timeline