DoD's $2M contract for contractor onboarding support awarded to Techniko LLC, with 729 days duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,018,842 ($2.0M)

Contractor: Techniko LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2024-08-09

End Date: 2026-08-08

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: RAPID CONTRACTOR ONBOARDING SUPPORT SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: HANOVER, ANNE ARUNDEL County, MARYLAND, 21076

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $2.0 million to TECHNIKO LLC for work described as: RAPID CONTRACTOR ONBOARDING SUPPORT SERVICES Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the specialized nature of security clearance support. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open competition after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate selection process. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, primarily related to contractor performance and timely delivery of services. 4. Performance context is tied to the critical need for efficient onboarding of personnel requiring security clearances. 5. Sector positioning is within defense intelligence support services, a niche but vital area.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $2 million over two years for contractor onboarding support is within a reasonable range for specialized services. Benchmarking against similar contracts for security clearance processing and onboarding assistance suggests that the pricing is competitive, especially considering the sensitive nature of the work and the required expertise. The contract's focus on labor hours allows for flexibility, but requires careful monitoring to ensure efficient resource utilization and prevent cost overruns.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This implies that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources were excluded, potentially due to prior performance, security concerns, or specialized capabilities. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the 'exclusion of sources' suggests a more curated selection process than a completely open bid.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources may limit the breadth of competition, potentially impacting the lowest possible price for taxpayers. However, it could also ensure that only highly qualified and vetted contractors participate, reducing risks associated with performance and security.

Public Impact

Benefits defense personnel and contractors requiring security clearances by streamlining the onboarding process. Delivers essential support services to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA). Geographic impact is primarily within Maryland, where the DCSA is located and services are likely rendered. Workforce implications include the need for specialized personnel to manage and execute onboarding and clearance processes.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for delays in onboarding if contractor performance falters.
Risk of security breaches if contractor personnel are not adequately vetted or supervised.
Dependency on a single contractor for a critical function could create vulnerabilities.

Positive Signals

Contract aims to improve efficiency in a critical national security function.
Awarded to a contractor with a specific focus on support services.
Clear performance period and delivery order structure provide defined expectations.

Sector Analysis

The defense intelligence support sector is characterized by high security requirements, specialized expertise, and stringent regulatory oversight. Contracts in this area often involve sensitive information and critical national security functions. The market size for such services is substantial, driven by the continuous need for personnel vetting and onboarding within various government agencies. This contract fits within the broader category of professional services supporting defense operations, where efficiency and reliability are paramount.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary contractor, Techniko LLC, will likely manage the entire scope of work. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless Techniko LLC voluntarily engages small businesses for specialized support.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA). Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and delivery schedules. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases, though specific operational details may be classified or sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Personnel Security Investigations
Contractor Vetting Services
Defense Security Support
Federal Employee Onboarding
Intelligence Community Support

Risk Flags

Potential for performance delays
Security risks associated with sensitive data
Limited competition due to source exclusion

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $2.0 million to TECHNIKO LLC. RAPID CONTRACTOR ONBOARDING SUPPORT SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TECHNIKO LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-08-09. End: 2026-08-08.

What is Techniko LLC's track record with similar government contracts, particularly those involving security clearances and onboarding?

Information regarding Techniko LLC's specific track record with government contracts, especially those directly related to security clearances and personnel onboarding, is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), contract history, and any documented successes or failures on similar projects. Without this data, it is difficult to definitively assess their experience and reliability in this specialized domain. Further investigation into their contract portfolio and client feedback would be necessary to establish a robust understanding of their capabilities and past performance.

How does the awarded amount of $2,001,842.01 compare to the estimated value or budget for this type of service?

The provided data indicates an awarded amount of $2,001,842.01 for 'RAPID CONTRACTOR ONBOARDING SUPPORT SERVICES' with a duration of 729 days. Without access to the original contract solicitation, independent government cost estimates, or market research data used during the procurement process, it is challenging to definitively benchmark this award value against an expected budget. However, considering the specialized nature of security clearance support and contractor onboarding within the Department of Defense, this figure appears to be within a plausible range for a two-year service contract. A more precise comparison would necessitate access to the agency's internal cost estimates and analysis of similar contracts awarded in the market.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

The primary risks associated with this contract likely revolve around contractor performance, timely delivery of services, and potential security vulnerabilities. Inefficient onboarding processes could delay critical personnel access, impacting operational readiness. Security risks could arise if contractor personnel mishandle sensitive information or fail to adhere to strict vetting protocols. Mitigation strategies typically include robust performance monitoring by the contracting officer's representative (COR), clearly defined service level agreements (SLAs), regular performance reviews, and strict adherence to security protocols and background checks for all personnel involved. The contract's structure, including delivery orders and defined performance periods, also serves as a control mechanism.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' approach in ensuring both quality and cost-effectiveness for taxpayers?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' approach aims to balance broad competition with the need for specific qualifications or security assurances. By excluding certain sources, the agency may be targeting contractors with proven track records, specialized capabilities, or those who have already undergone initial vetting. This can lead to higher quality services by ensuring only suitable contractors participate. However, excluding sources can also limit the competitive pool, potentially leading to higher prices than a truly unrestricted open competition might yield. The effectiveness for taxpayers hinges on whether the exclusions were justified by demonstrable needs for specialized expertise or security, and whether sufficient competition remained among the included sources to drive a fair price.

What is the historical spending pattern for contractor onboarding support services within the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA)?

The provided data only pertains to a single contract awarded in 2024. To understand historical spending patterns for contractor onboarding support services within the DCSA, one would need to analyze contract data over multiple fiscal years. This would involve searching for similar contract vehicles, delivery orders, and task orders issued by the DCSA for onboarding, vetting, and related support services. Examining trends in contract values, durations, number of awards, and incumbent contractors would reveal patterns in how the agency procures these services, identify periods of increased or decreased spending, and highlight any shifts in procurement strategies or contractor base over time.

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

Solicitation ID: HS002124Q0029

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 8403 COLESVILLE RD STE 1100, SILVER SPRING, MD, 20910

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,988,152

Exercised Options: $2,611,629

Current Obligation: $2,018,842

Actual Outlays: $17,112

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QRAD20D8191

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline