DoD's $876M Contract for Afghan Police Mentoring & Training Faces Scrutiny Over Value and Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $876,196,089 ($876.2M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-12-20

End Date: 2016-03-07

Contract Duration: 1,904 days

Daily Burn Rate: $460.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: AFGHANISTAN MINISTRY OF INTERIOR/AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE MENTORING&TRAINING WITH LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES.

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $876.2 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: AFGHANISTAN MINISTRY OF INTERIOR/AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE MENTORING&TRAINING WITH LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES. Key points: 1. Significant expenditure on a complex, long-term program in a volatile region. 2. Lack of transparency regarding domestic awardees raises concerns about competition and value. 3. High risk associated with program effectiveness and taxpayer return in a challenging environment. 4. Services fall under administrative and management consulting, a broad category with varying cost benchmarks.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total award value of over $876 million is substantial. Without clear details on the specific services rendered and the performance metrics achieved, it's difficult to benchmark against similar contracts. The 'cost plus fixed fee' structure can incentivize cost overruns if not tightly managed.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

While advertised as 'full and open competition,' the disclosure of 'domestic awardees (undisclosed)' significantly hinders the assessment of actual competition. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to determine if the best possible price and value were achieved for the taxpayer.

Taxpayer Impact: The immense cost of this contract raises significant questions about the efficient use of taxpayer funds, especially given the challenges in Afghanistan and the lack of clear performance indicators.

Public Impact

Taxpayers funded extensive mentoring and training for Afghan security forces, aiming for stability. The program's success is intrinsically linked to the complex geopolitical situation in Afghanistan. Lack of detailed public reporting on outcomes makes it hard to gauge the program's effectiveness and long-term impact.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of transparency on awardees
High contract value with unclear ROI
Geopolitical instability impacting program effectiveness
Cost-plus contract type can lead to overruns

Positive Signals

Attempted to build capacity in Afghan security forces
Utilized a full and open competition strategy

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under administrative management and general management consulting services. Spending in this sector can vary widely depending on the scope and complexity. Given the context of international security assistance and nation-building, the benchmarks for such services are often less defined than in typical domestic consulting.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that the awardees were domestic but undisclosed, and the contract was not set aside for small businesses. Therefore, there is no specific analysis available regarding small business participation in this particular contract.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'full and open competition' designation suggests an intent for oversight, but the lack of transparency regarding the specific awardees and detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of oversight mechanisms and accountability for this substantial expenditure.

Related Government Programs

Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of transparency on awardees
High contract value with unclear return on investment
Geopolitical instability impacting program effectiveness
Cost-plus contract type increases risk of overruns
Difficulty in benchmarking services due to unique context
Potential for funds to be mismanaged or misused

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $876.2 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). AFGHANISTAN MINISTRY OF INTERIOR/AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE MENTORING&TRAINING WITH LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $876.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-12-20. End: 2016-03-07.

What specific metrics were used to define and measure the success of the mentoring and training program, and how were these metrics achieved or not achieved?

The provided data does not include specific metrics for program success. Typically, such programs would track indicators like the number of personnel trained, improved operational capabilities, reduction in corruption, and increased self-sufficiency of the Afghan National Police. Without this information, it's impossible to assess if the $876 million investment yielded the desired outcomes or if adjustments were made based on performance.

Given the 'cost plus fixed fee' structure and the undisclosed domestic awardees, what steps were taken to mitigate the risk of cost overruns and ensure fair pricing?

The 'cost plus fixed fee' (CPFF) contract type inherently carries a risk of cost overruns, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee. To mitigate this, the government should have implemented rigorous oversight, detailed cost auditing, and clear performance expectations tied to the fee. The lack of transparency on awardees makes it difficult to ascertain if competitive pressures were effectively leveraged to ensure fair pricing.

How did the program adapt to the evolving geopolitical landscape in Afghanistan, and what was the impact on the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of the services provided?

The effectiveness and cost-efficiency of programs in Afghanistan are highly susceptible to the dynamic geopolitical environment. Adaptability would involve adjusting training methodologies, security protocols, and program objectives in response to changing conditions on the ground. Without specific reporting on these adaptations and their impact, it's challenging to evaluate whether the substantial investment remained relevant and efficient throughout the contract period.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W91CRB10R0059

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $915,666,158

Exercised Options: $915,062,573

Current Obligation: $876,196,089

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline