DoD's $62M DynCorp contract for air transport support saw limited competition and a long duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $62,183,494 ($62.2M)

Contractor: Dyncorp International LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2001-01-31

End Date: 2010-12-31

Contract Duration: 3,621 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Place of Performance

Location: FORT WORTH, TARRANT County, TEXAS, 76177

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $62.2 million to DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC for work described as: Key points: 1. The contract's extended period of performance suggests a need for sustained support, but also raises questions about long-term cost-effectiveness. 2. A firm-fixed-price structure generally transfers risk to the contractor, potentially leading to higher initial bids but predictable costs. 3. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating an effort to solicit a broad range of potential providers. 4. The relatively low number of bids received (2) warrants further investigation into potential barriers to entry or market concentration. 5. The absence of small business set-asides means opportunities for smaller firms may have been limited. 6. The contract's focus on air transportation support aligns with critical defense logistics needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests cost certainty, but the total value over nearly a decade indicates significant investment. Comparing it to similar long-term, broad air support contracts would be necessary to assess if the pricing was competitive for the scope and duration.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which is generally the preferred method for maximizing competition and achieving best value. However, with only two bids received, the level of actual competition may have been constrained. This could be due to the specialized nature of the services, the contract's duration, or other market factors that limited the number of capable and willing bidders.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition was utilized, the low number of bidders suggests that taxpayers may not have benefited from the full potential of a highly competitive bidding process, potentially leading to less aggressive pricing than might have been achieved with more offers.

Public Impact

Military personnel and units requiring logistical support for air transportation operations are the primary beneficiaries. The contract facilitated essential services for maintaining and operating air transport capabilities. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around military installations or operational areas where air transport is critical. The contract supported a workforce involved in specialized air transportation services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (nearly 10 years) could indicate potential for cost overruns or evolving needs not fully captured in initial pricing.
Limited number of bidders (2) raises concerns about the effectiveness of the competition and potential for suboptimal pricing.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value and effectiveness of the services provided.
Absence of small business set-aside may have excluded smaller, potentially innovative companies from participating.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract structure transfers cost risk to the contractor, providing budget certainty.
Awarded under full and open competition, adhering to best practices for soliciting a wide range of offers.
Contract duration suggests a stable, long-term requirement for critical air transportation support services.

Sector Analysis

The defense logistics and support services sector is characterized by complex requirements and specialized capabilities. Contracts like this are crucial for maintaining the operational readiness of military forces. The market often involves a mix of large, established defense contractors and niche service providers. Spending in this area is driven by global operational tempo and the need for reliable support infrastructure, with significant government investment typically allocated to ensure mission success.

Small Business Impact

This contract did not include a small business set-aside, meaning it was not specifically targeted to encourage participation by small businesses. Consequently, the primary contractor, DynCorp International LLC, is likely a large business. While large contracts can sometimes include subcontracting opportunities for small businesses, the absence of a set-aside suggests that direct opportunities for small businesses to compete for the prime contract were limited.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Department of Defense, likely through the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), given its role in contract administration. Accountability measures would typically involve performance reviews, adherence to contract terms, and financial audits. Transparency would depend on the public availability of contract details and performance reports, which can vary for defense contracts.

Related Government Programs

Defense Logistics Agency Support Contracts
Military Airfield Operations Support
Expeditionary Air Support Services
Global Mobility Command Contracts

Risk Flags

Low number of bidders
Long contract duration
Lack of specific performance metrics in summary data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $62.2 million to DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $62.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2001-01-31. End: 2010-12-31.

What was DynCorp International LLC's performance history on this specific contract?

Assessing DynCorp International LLC's performance on this specific contract (awarded 2001, ended 2010) requires access to detailed contract performance reports, which are often not publicly available. However, given the contract's long duration and firm-fixed-price nature, it suggests a level of sustained performance that met the Department of Defense's requirements. Without specific data on delivery timeliness, quality of service, or any contract disputes or modifications, a definitive performance evaluation is difficult. DynCorp is a large defense contractor with a broad range of services, and its overall track record would need to be considered alongside this specific contract's history.

How does the $62 million total value compare to similar air transportation support contracts awarded around the same period?

Comparing the $62 million total value of this contract to similar air transportation support contracts requires a detailed market analysis of defense procurements between 2001 and 2010. Contracts for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' (NAICS 488190) can vary significantly based on scope, duration, geographic location, and specific services (e.g., maintenance, ground support, flight operations). A $62 million contract over nearly a decade averages approximately $6.2 million per year. This figure needs to be benchmarked against contracts of similar scale and complexity to determine if it represents good value. Factors like the number of aircraft supported, operational tempo, and specific support functions would be critical for a precise comparison.

What were the primary risks associated with this contract, and how were they managed?

Primary risks for a long-term, firm-fixed-price contract like this could include scope creep, contractor underperformance, unforeseen operational demands, and potential cost increases due to inflation or material shortages (though FFP mitigates direct cost pass-through). Given the firm-fixed-price structure, the primary risk was transferred to DynCorp International LLC. Risk management by the DoD would have involved robust oversight, clear performance standards, and potentially contract modifications for significant changes in requirements. The long duration also presents a risk of the contracted services becoming outdated or less efficient compared to evolving technologies or operational needs.

How effective was the 'full and open competition' in achieving competitive pricing, given only two bids?

The effectiveness of 'full and open competition' in achieving competitive pricing is questionable when only two bids are received. While the process itself is designed to solicit maximum participation, a low number of bidders suggests potential barriers to entry, a lack of market capacity, or that the solicitation may not have reached all qualified potential offerors. With only two bidders, the government has limited leverage to negotiate aggressive pricing, and the risk of collusion or a less-than-optimal price is higher than in a scenario with multiple competitive bids. Further analysis would be needed to understand why only two companies submitted proposals.

What is the historical spending trend for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' within the Department of Defense?

Historical spending trends for 'Other Support Activities for Air Transportation' (NAICS 488190) within the Department of Defense are generally substantial, reflecting the military's reliance on air mobility and logistics. This spending fluctuates based on global military operations, force structure changes, and budget allocations. Over the period this contract was active (2001-2010), defense spending, particularly related to operations in the Middle East, was high, likely driving increased demand and spending in support services like air transportation. Analyzing DoD's overall budget for transportation and logistics services would provide context for this specific contract's spending within the broader trend.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Support Activities for Air Transportation › Other Support Activities for Air Transportation

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. (UEI: 014784388)

Address: 6500 WEST FREEWAY, SUITE 6, FORT WORTH, TX, 76116

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline