DoD's $995K contract for expeditionary training camps at Besmaya awarded to foreign entities

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,952,232 ($10.0M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-10-26

End Date: 2008-04-02

Contract Duration: 524 days

Daily Burn Rate: $19.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: {PIIN: W91GY007C0002} ESTABLISH TWO EXPEDITIONARY TRAINING CAMPS AT BESMAYA

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.0 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: {PIIN: W91GY007C0002} ESTABLISH TWO EXPEDITIONARY TRAINING CAMPS AT BESMAYA Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for establishing two training camps, considering potential logistical and security costs in a complex environment. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a broad search for qualified bidders. 3. The contract duration of 524 days indicates a significant, multi-month project. 4. Award to 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees' raises questions about the specific capabilities and oversight of the selected entities. 5. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 6. This contract falls under Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services, suggesting a focus on operational setup and support.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $995,223 for establishing two expeditionary training camps is difficult to benchmark without specific details on the scope of work, location challenges, and required amenities. However, for a project of this nature, the estimated cost per camp is approximately $497,611. This figure needs to be compared against similar deployments or construction projects in comparable regions to assess value for money. The fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty, but the actual value realized depends on the contractor's efficiency and the quality of the delivered facilities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that the Department of Defense sought proposals from all responsible sources. The number of bidders is not specified, but this method generally promotes a competitive environment, allowing for a wider range of potential contractors to submit offers. This approach aims to secure the best value by leveraging market forces to drive down prices and improve service quality.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices and access to a broader pool of innovative solutions, ensuring that government funds are used efficiently.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military personnel who will utilize the training facilities. The services delivered include the establishment of two expeditionary training camps, implying infrastructure development and logistical support. The geographic impact is specific to Besmaya, likely in Iraq, a region requiring specialized logistical and security considerations. Workforce implications could involve local hires for construction and support roles, alongside the deployment of specialized personnel by the awarded contractor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Award to 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees' lacks specificity and could obscure accountability.
Limited information on the contractor's track record or specific expertise in establishing expeditionary training camps.
Potential challenges in oversight and quality control due to the nature of the awardee.

Positive Signals

Utilizing full and open competition increases the likelihood of finding capable providers.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contract duration suggests a comprehensive approach to camp establishment.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services sector, specifically related to operational support and infrastructure development in a challenging environment. The market for establishing expeditionary facilities is often driven by defense and security needs, with significant spending occurring during periods of geopolitical instability or military operations. Benchmarking this contract's value is difficult without comparable data on similar projects in conflict zones, which are inherently high-cost and high-risk.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the awardee is listed as 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees,' suggesting no direct subcontracting opportunities for U.S. small businesses were specified or prioritized in this award. The absence of small business involvement could limit the broader economic impact on the U.S. small business ecosystem for this particular contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of the Army contracting officer and potentially contracting officer representatives (CORs) deployed to the site. Accountability measures are inherent in the Firm Fixed Price contract, where the contractor is responsible for delivering the agreed-upon scope within budget. Transparency is limited by the nature of the awardee and the lack of detailed public information regarding performance metrics and oversight activities.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support
Logistics and Supply Chain Management
Construction Services
Contingency Contracting

Risk Flags

Lack of specific awardee identification
Potential oversight challenges with foreign awardees
Limited public data on performance metrics

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.0 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. {PIIN: W91GY007C0002} ESTABLISH TWO EXPEDITIONARY TRAINING CAMPS AT BESMAYA

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 $10.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-10-26. End: 2008-04-02.

What specific capabilities and experience do the 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees' possess relevant to establishing expeditionary training camps?

The designation 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees' is highly generic and provides no specific insight into the capabilities, experience, or track record of the entities that received this contract. In a typical procurement process, awardees are identified by name, allowing for assessment of their past performance, technical expertise, and financial stability. The vagueness here suggests either a consolidation of multiple smaller foreign entities under a single award or a lack of detailed reporting on the specific subcontractors or prime contractors involved. Without this information, it is impossible to ascertain if the government secured the most qualified and reliable partners for establishing critical training infrastructure in a potentially volatile region. Further investigation would be needed to identify the actual entities and evaluate their suitability.

How does the cost of establishing these two training camps compare to similar projects in comparable operational environments?

Benchmarking the $995,223 cost for two expeditionary training camps is challenging without detailed specifications of the facilities, required amenities, security measures, and logistical complexities inherent to the Besmaya location. Projects in operational theaters often incur higher costs due to security, transportation, and the need for rapid deployment. If these camps involved substantial infrastructure (barracks, dining facilities, training grounds, security perimeters), the cost might be considered reasonable, especially if sourced through full and open competition. However, if the scope was more limited, the cost per camp (approx. $497,611) could be on the higher side. A comparative analysis with similar U.S. military or contractor-led construction projects in the Middle East, accounting for differences in scale and security, would be necessary for a definitive value assessment.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a contract to 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees' for critical infrastructure development?

Awarding a contract to 'Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees' presents several potential risks. Firstly, it can obscure accountability, making it difficult to pinpoint responsibility if issues arise regarding performance, quality, or compliance. Secondly, vetting the capabilities, financial stability, and ethical standards of multiple, potentially unknown foreign entities is more complex than assessing a single, named contractor. There may also be challenges in enforcing contract terms, managing communication across different languages and cultures, and ensuring adherence to U.S. government standards and regulations. Furthermore, reliance on foreign entities could introduce geopolitical risks or supply chain vulnerabilities. The government must have robust oversight mechanisms in place to mitigate these inherent risks.

What oversight mechanisms were in place to ensure the quality and timely completion of the training camps?

Given the contract was awarded by the Department of the Army and likely managed within a contingency operations context, oversight would typically involve a Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) or a similar designated official responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring quality standards are met, and verifying progress against the contract schedule. Site visits, regular progress reports from the contractor, and potentially independent quality assurance inspections would be standard procedures. The Firm Fixed Price nature of the contract incentivizes the contractor to manage their own quality control to avoid cost overruns. However, the effectiveness of oversight heavily depends on the resources allocated, the COR's presence and expertise, and the clarity of the contract's performance work statement (PWS).

How does the duration of the contract (524 days) reflect the complexity of establishing expeditionary training camps?

A contract duration of 524 days (approximately 17 months) suggests a significant undertaking in establishing the two expeditionary training camps. This timeframe likely encompasses detailed planning, procurement of materials, construction, installation of necessary utilities and facilities, security measures, and potentially initial operational setup. Such a duration is not unusual for projects involving infrastructure development in potentially remote or challenging environments, where logistical hurdles, security considerations, and phased construction can extend timelines. It indicates that the scope of work was substantial, requiring more than a simple setup and implying a need for robust and potentially long-term facilities.

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: $9,952,232

Exercised Options: $9,952,232

Current Obligation: $9,952,232

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Timeline