DynCorp International LLC awarded $47.15M for Iraq facilities support, a non-competitive delivery order

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $47,152,341 ($47.2M)

Contractor: Dyncorp International LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2005-02-03

End Date: 2013-01-31

Contract Duration: 2,919 days

Daily Burn Rate: $16.2K/day

Competition Type: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS

Sector: Other

Official Description: SLMAQM04C0030 IRAQ RATIFICATION

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $47.2 million to DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC for work described as: SLMAQM04C0030 IRAQ RATIFICATION Key points: 1. The contract's value of $47.15M over its duration suggests a significant investment in facilities support. 2. As a non-competitive delivery order, the pricing and value proposition warrant close examination against market standards. 3. The extended duration of nearly 8 years indicates a long-term need for these services in a complex environment. 4. The absence of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and limited opportunities for cost savings. 5. Facilities support services are critical for operational continuity in challenging geopolitical regions. 6. The contract's reliance on labor hours may introduce cost variability and require robust performance monitoring.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its non-competitive nature and specific geographic context (Iraq). However, the total award of $47.15M for facilities support over approximately eight years, utilizing a labor-hour contract type, suggests a substantial expenditure. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to ascertain if the pricing reflects fair market value or if efficiencies could have been achieved through a more competitive procurement process. The lack of detailed cost breakdowns makes a precise per-unit cost comparison difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a non-competitive delivery order, indicating that it was not subjected to a full and open competition. This typically occurs when a specific contractor is deemed the only viable source, or in urgent situations. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no direct price comparison or negotiation driven by market forces, potentially leading to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure, as the government did not benefit from the cost-saving mechanisms inherent in a competitive bidding process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely U.S. government personnel and operations in Iraq, who rely on stable and functional facilities. Services delivered include essential facilities support, ensuring the operational readiness of diplomatic or military installations. The geographic impact is concentrated within Iraq, supporting U.S. presence and activities in that region. Workforce implications include the employment of personnel, both local and potentially expatriate, to perform the facilities maintenance and support tasks.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Non-competitive award limits price discovery and potential savings.
Labor-hour contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed.
Extended contract duration in a volatile region presents inherent risks.
Lack of transparency in pricing due to sole-source nature.

Positive Signals

Ensures critical facilities support in a high-need operational environment.
DynCorp International has experience in complex logistical and support operations.
Long-term contract provides stability for service delivery.

Sector Analysis

Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) represent a broad category encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and grounds. This sector is crucial for government operations, particularly in overseas or complex environments where maintaining infrastructure is paramount. The global market for facilities management is substantial, with government contracts forming a significant portion. This specific contract fits within the broader defense and diplomatic support services market, often characterized by long-term agreements and specialized requirements.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. Therefore, it is unlikely to have a direct positive impact on the small business ecosystem. The focus appears to be on a large prime contractor fulfilling a significant service requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the contracting agency (Department of State) and potentially relevant Inspector General offices. Given the non-competitive nature and the location, robust oversight would be critical to ensure performance, prevent fraud, and manage costs effectively. Transparency is often limited in sole-source awards, making active oversight even more vital for accountability.

Related Government Programs

Department of State Overseas Buildings Operations
Logistics and Base Support Contracts
Contingency Contracting
Facilities Maintenance and Repair Services

Risk Flags

Non-competitive award
Labor-hour contract type
Operations in a contingency environment
Extended contract duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $47.2 million to DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC. SLMAQM04C0030 IRAQ RATIFICATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DYNCORP INTERNATIONAL LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $47.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-02-03. End: 2013-01-31.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a non-competitive basis?

The provided data indicates this was a 'NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER'. Typically, such awards are justified under specific circumstances outlined in federal acquisition regulations, such as the existence of only one responsible source, urgent and compelling needs, or specific national security requirements. Without further documentation (like a Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition - JOFOC), the precise reason remains unspecified. However, the context of operations in Iraq during the mid-2000s to early 2010s often involved complex logistical challenges and security concerns that could have influenced the procurement approach, potentially favoring established contractors with proven capabilities in that environment.

How does the total contract value compare to similar facilities support contracts in overseas contingency operations?

Comparing this $47.15M contract value directly to 'similar' contracts is challenging without more specific parameters. Facilities support contracts in overseas contingency operations (like Iraq) can vary significantly based on the scope of services (e.g., base operations, construction, maintenance, security integration), the size and type of facility, the duration, and the specific risks associated with the location. However, for a nearly eight-year period, $47.15M represents an average annual value of approximately $6 million. This figure is within the range of large-scale base operations and support contracts but could be considered high or low depending on the exact services rendered and the prevailing market rates and risk premiums for operating in Iraq during that timeframe. The non-competitive nature further complicates direct value comparisons.

What are the primary risks associated with a labor-hour contract type for facilities support in Iraq?

The primary risks associated with a labor-hour (LH) contract type for facilities support in Iraq, especially for a contract of this magnitude and duration, include cost uncertainty and potential for overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, LH contracts pay the contractor for the direct labor hours at specified rates and for the associated overhead and profit. This means the total cost is not fixed upfront and depends heavily on the actual hours worked. In a complex and potentially demanding environment like Iraq, there's a risk that unforeseen circumstances, security issues, or inefficient performance could lead to significantly more labor hours being expended than initially anticipated, driving up the total cost. Robust oversight, detailed timesheet verification, and clear performance standards are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What was DynCorp International's track record prior to or during this contract?

DynCorp International has a long history of providing services to the U.S. government, particularly in areas of logistics, aviation, and security support in complex environments. Prior to and during the period of this contract (2005-2013), DynCorp was a significant player in government contracting, often involved in large-scale support operations in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The company has faced scrutiny and investigations regarding its operations and contract performance in various theaters. While specific details of their track record related solely to this SLMAQM04C0030 contract are not provided here, DynCorp's broader history suggests a capacity for large-scale operations but also a history that has attracted oversight and occasional controversy.

How did the contract's performance period (2005-2013) align with the U.S. presence and operational tempo in Iraq?

The contract's performance period, February 3, 2005, to January 31, 2013, largely overlaps with a critical and intense phase of U.S. military and diplomatic engagement in Iraq. The initial years (2005-2007) were marked by significant counter-insurgency operations and troop surges. The latter part of the contract (post-2007) saw shifts in strategy, including the 'surge' and subsequent drawdown efforts, culminating in the withdrawal of U.S. troops by the end of 2011, though diplomatic and support personnel remained. Facilities support would have been essential throughout this dynamic period, adapting to changing operational footprints, security levels, and mission requirements. The long duration suggests a sustained need for these services regardless of the fluctuating military presence.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NON-COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: LABOR HOURS (Z)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Veritas Capital Fund II L P (UEI: 160610809)

Address: 6500 WEST FREEWAY, SUITE 600, FORT WORTH, TX, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $47,152,341

Exercised Options: $47,152,341

Current Obligation: $47,152,341

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: SLMAQM04C0030

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline