DoD's $34.8M intelligence advisory contract awarded to Credence Dynamo Solutions LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,866,135 ($34.9M)

Contractor: Credence Dynamo Solutions LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-04-01

End Date: 2026-11-30

Contract Duration: 973 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE LEVEL OF EFFORT

Sector: Defense

Official Description: A2 INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT

Place of Performance

Location: HAMPTON, HAMPTON CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23665

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.9 million to CREDENCE DYNAMO SOLUTIONS LLC for work described as: A2 INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in specialized intelligence advisory services. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a robust market for these critical support functions. 3. Performance period extends over two years, indicating a need for sustained support. 4. The contract type, Fixed Price Level of Effort, aims to control costs while ensuring service delivery. 5. This award falls within the broader category of engineering and technical services for the Air Force. 6. The small business status of the awardee is not applicable, suggesting a focus on established prime contractors.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of approximately $34.8 million over its period of performance appears reasonable for specialized intelligence advisory and technical assistance. Benchmarking against similar contracts for intelligence support within the Department of Defense is crucial for a definitive value assessment. However, the fixed-price level-of-effort structure suggests an attempt to manage costs by defining specific service requirements and effort levels, which can be a cost-effective approach when scope is well-defined. Without direct comparisons to identical services from other agencies or contractors, a precise value-for-money judgment is challenging, but the award seems within a plausible range for this type of specialized support.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific circumstances led to the exclusion of certain potential bidders. The exact reasons for this exclusion are not detailed but could stem from specific technical requirements, security clearances, or prior performance issues with other potential offerors. The limited nature of the competition, despite the 'full and open' preamble, may have implications for the breadth of price discovery and the potential for achieving the lowest possible price.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources, even if justified, can limit the number of competitive bids received. This may result in a higher price for taxpayers compared to a scenario with broader, unrestricted competition.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Air Force, receiving critical intelligence advisory and technical assistance. Services delivered are expected to enhance intelligence analysis, operational planning, and technical support for Air Force missions. The geographic impact is likely concentrated within the operational areas and headquarters of the Department of the Air Force. Workforce implications may include the direct employment of specialized intelligence analysts and technical experts by the prime contractor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited price competition due to exclusion of sources.
Reliance on a single contractor for specialized intelligence advisory services could pose a risk if performance falters.
The 'level of effort' contract type requires careful monitoring to ensure efficient resource utilization.

Positive Signals

Award to an established entity (Credence Dynamo Solutions LLC) suggests a degree of confidence in their capabilities.
The fixed-price structure provides cost predictability for the government.
The extended performance period indicates a recognized, ongoing need for these services.

Sector Analysis

The intelligence advisory and technical assistance sector is a critical component of national security spending, supporting various defense and intelligence agencies. This contract falls under the broader engineering services (NAICS 541330) and professional, scientific, and technical services categories. The market for these services is characterized by specialized expertise, high security clearances, and often long-term relationships between government clients and contractors. Spending in this area is influenced by evolving geopolitical threats and technological advancements, requiring continuous adaptation and support.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the prime contractor, Credence Dynamo Solutions LLC, is not identified as a small business in this context. This suggests that the requirement was likely beyond the scope or capability typically met by small businesses for prime contracts of this nature. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses, which could be a missed opportunity to engage the small business ecosystem in supporting this critical defense need.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily reside with the contracting officers and program managers within the Department of the Air Force. The fixed-price level-of-effort structure necessitates monitoring of the contractor's effort and deliverables to ensure compliance with the contract terms. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS, though specific performance metrics and detailed oversight reports are typically internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Intelligence Support Services
Technical Assistance Contracts
Engineering Services
Department of Defense Advisory Contracts
Air Force Intelligence Support

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Potential for cost overruns if effort level is misjudged.
Reliance on contractor for critical intelligence functions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.9 million to CREDENCE DYNAMO SOLUTIONS LLC. A2 INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CREDENCE DYNAMO SOLUTIONS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $34.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-04-01. End: 2026-11-30.

What is the track record of Credence Dynamo Solutions LLC in performing similar intelligence advisory and technical assistance contracts for the Department of Defense?

Assessing the track record of Credence Dynamo Solutions LLC requires a review of their past performance on similar contracts. This would involve examining contract databases for previous awards, performance evaluations, and any reported issues or successes. For intelligence advisory and technical assistance, key indicators would include their experience with specific intelligence disciplines, the complexity of previous projects, and client satisfaction ratings. A strong track record would demonstrate their ability to meet the demanding requirements of the Air Force, including security protocols, analytical rigor, and timely delivery of support. Without specific past performance data readily available in this summary, further investigation into their contract history and client feedback is recommended to fully gauge their suitability and reliability for this $34.8 million award.

How does the pricing structure (Fixed Price Level of Effort) compare to other intelligence advisory contracts of similar scope and duration?

The Fixed Price Level of Effort (FPLE) contract type aims to provide cost certainty for the government by establishing a fixed price for a defined amount of contractor effort. This differs from other pricing structures like Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) or Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) for services. In FPLE, the contractor is paid a fixed amount for a specified number of labor hours or other effort units. If the contractor completes the effort in fewer hours, they still receive the fixed price. If they require more hours, they may not be compensated beyond the agreed-upon level without contract modification. Compared to CPFF, FPLE offers more cost predictability for the government but less flexibility for the contractor if unforeseen complexities arise. Compared to FFP for services, FPLE is more focused on the effort expended rather than a fixed outcome, which can be suitable for advisory roles where the exact deliverables might evolve. Benchmarking requires comparing the hourly rates or total effort price against similar contracts awarded under different structures, considering the specific skill sets and security requirements involved.

What are the primary risks associated with a 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award for intelligence services?

Awarding intelligence services under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' presents specific risks. Primarily, the exclusion of certain sources, even if justified by specific criteria, inherently limits the competitive pool. This reduction in competition can lead to less aggressive pricing, potentially resulting in higher costs for the government compared to a truly unrestricted competition. Furthermore, the reasons for exclusion might indicate specialized capabilities or security requirements that are difficult to meet, potentially concentrating risk with the few capable bidders. There's also a risk that the excluded sources might possess unique insights or technologies that could have offered superior value or innovation. Transparency regarding the rationale for exclusion is crucial to ensure fairness and to mitigate concerns about potential favoritability or artificial market constraints.

How effective is the 'Fixed Price Level of Effort' contract type in ensuring value for money for specialized intelligence advisory services?

The effectiveness of the Fixed Price Level of Effort (FPLE) contract type in ensuring value for money for specialized intelligence advisory services is contingent on several factors. FPLE provides cost predictability by fixing the price for a defined level of effort (e.g., hours). This is beneficial when the scope of work is relatively well-understood but the exact duration or specific tasks might evolve. It incentivizes the contractor to perform the agreed-upon effort efficiently to maintain their profit margin. However, value for money is maximized when the 'level of effort' is accurately estimated and the contractor is motivated to deliver high-quality analysis and advice within that effort. If the effort is underestimated, the government might not receive sufficient support. If it's overestimated, taxpayers could pay for unnecessary work. Close monitoring of contractor performance and the quality of deliverables is essential to ensure that the fixed effort translates into valuable outcomes.

What is the historical spending trend for intelligence advisory and technical assistance support within the Department of the Air Force?

Analyzing historical spending trends for intelligence advisory and technical assistance support within the Department of the Air Force (DAF) is crucial for context. This involves examining aggregate spending data over several fiscal years for contracts categorized under relevant NAICS codes (like 541330 - Engineering Services, or others related to intelligence analysis and support) and PSC codes. Trends might reveal increasing or decreasing reliance on external contractors for these services, shifts in the types of support being procured, and fluctuations in average contract values. Understanding these patterns helps in assessing whether the current $34.8 million award is an anomaly, a continuation of a trend, or part of a strategic shift in how the DAF acquires intelligence capabilities. Such analysis can also highlight periods of significant investment or budget constraints impacting this sector.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE LEVEL OF EFFORT (B)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1951 KIDWELL DR STE 550, VIENNA, VA, 22182

Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, SBA Certified 8 a Joint Venture, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $99,937,157

Exercised Options: $53,512,724

Current Obligation: $34,866,135

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QRAD20D1042

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline