Feral Jundi

Thursday, January 24, 2019

Industry Talk: US Border Patrol Goes Sole Source FFP With G4S For Security Services At Border

Filed under: Arizona,California,Industry Talk,New Mexico,Texas — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 8:26 PM

According to this FBO solicitation, G4S is the only company that can provide these services in the time frame needed. It is also worth $50 million. The reason? Here is a clip from the FBO posting.

Due to the Government shutdown and migrant caravan situation on the southwest border, G4S is the only vendor that can provide these transportation and transportation guard services beginning on March 4, 2019.

I guess the other obvious point here is that government is once again turning to private industry to save the day. lol The Border Patrol is not getting paid, and that could be problematic if you have a caravan coming in that requires a lot of manpower. Or worse, the chances of CBP guys getting bribed could increase as this shutdown continues.

Another area to watch is the TSA. They are having issues with keeping folks in positions because they are not getting paid as well. Yet again, there are calls for private industry to come in and take over so airports do not have to suffer again through either poor government services, or payroll problems that stem from a divided congress and government shutdown.

Back to G4S though. They have a large security presence in the world and in the US and they have already been doing these Transportation Officer contracts with Homeland Security (that photo up top is from 2010). Just go to Indeed and read all the reviews. Also, if you go to their career website, they are offering quite a few of these positions with bonuses added.

I should note that the FBO solicitation says this about what they need G4S to do. So it is not just TO’s but actual security services. Maybe actual border patrol duties are next? Especially as the shutdown goes into uncharted territory as the longest one in US history.

Under the authority of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-2 Unusual and Compelling Urgency, CBP requires a sole source FFP type contract with G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. (DUNS 001903723) for vehicle security transportation and medical/facility security guard services for the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) along the southwest border of the United States.

On the issue of the border, keep your eyes on the companies tasked with building structures, and the security they will need to accomplish the task. Back in the day, SBI Net was all the rage for border security, and EODT (which is now Janus Global) was one of the security providers.

Finally, there is a surge element to this. Basically when manpower is needed yesterday, they are using contractors to fill that need. We have this migrant caravan coming from the south that could have thousands of people in it. There have already been several of these caravans that attempted to cross last year, and this current one is about 10,000 plus people. Mostly from Honduras. –Matt

 

 Under the authority of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-2 Unusual and Compelling Urgency, CBP requires a sole source FFP type contract with G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. (DUNS 001903723) for vehicle security transportation and medical/facility security guard services for the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) along the southwest border of the United States. USBP is a component of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP. The contract will have a base ordering period of 6 months (March 4, 2019 through September 3, 2019), with one 3-month option (September 4, 2019 through December 3, 2019). The total estimated valkue is approximately $50,000,000 for a base period of 6 months and a 3-month option period. Due to the Government shutdown and migrant caravan situation on the southwest border, G4S is the only vendor that can provide these transportation and transportation guard services beginning on March 4, 2019. This acquisition is only needed to provide CBP continuity of essential services while CBP executes the re- compete. Only G4S has the trained, certified and prepared Transport Officers (TOs) to cover all routes crossing state/sector lines. These same TOs can be used for unusual circumstances, such as surge for issues such as caravans and similar that requires crossing state/sector lines. No other vender can immediately provide the necessary transportation and facility/medical guard services that cover nine sectors which is CBP’s real and urgent need. CBP is currently planning a long term contract/BPA among GSA schedule 84 Category 246 54 holders for this requirement. That solicitation has not been released yet. As part of that process, CBP performed extensive market research to determine the current capability of GSA Schedule holders. While several large businesses have the long term capability of performing CBP’s transportation services, only G4S has the current capability to continue to provide the services effective March 4th 2019.
FBO solicitation here.

 

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Industry Talk: FBO–RFI For 500-600 Armed Guards For Kandahar Airfield

By the end of the year US troop levels in Afghanistan will fall to 9,800, with another 3,000 – 5,000 NATO troops sticking around as well through the end of 2016. And while those remaining forces will be focused solely on training and advising the Afghan Army, Air Force, police and border patrol mostly at the leader and Ministerial level in Kabul and a few other sites, jobs like security for the major bases will have to be outsourced to private companies.-Paul Macleary of the Intercepts blog.

This just came out and it is hot off the press. A big hat tip to the blog Intercepts over at Defense News for finding this one. So let’s dig into the particulars of this FBO RFI requiring between 500 and 600 folks to guard the Kandahar Airfield in Afghanistan.

The first thing that came to mind is the whole 45-60 day mobilization period? That is not a lot of time to recruit, train, and spin up such a sizable force. And if you force a company to adhere to such a thing, then they will get sloppy and they will allow bad seeds to get into the mix, just because of the sheer volume of guys they have to hire for this. Anything is possible, but the more you compress the time for this, the more the company will be rushed and will be sloppy with vetting and recruiting. The contract should emphasize the importance of spinning up a quality guard force, and the appropriate time to do so.

Also, I imagine that the standing force requirements are probably a little under half of this number, meaning maybe 200 to 300 guys actually on site protecting the facility (see the photo below)? So these guys that are standing up this contract better have some clue as to how static security works on this base and the leaders of this contract better know how to integrate well with the base QRF elements and the base defense plan. I highly recommend whatever company that stands this up, to study the Camp Bastion attack reports written by the Marines, so that they can get an idea of what their guard force needs to think about in Afghanistan. All actions by this guard force, should be focused on unity of command and unity of effort with BDOC or the military command and QRF of the base.

Another point. Base defenses these days have heavy weapons. If the Kandahar Airfield has posts with heavy weapons, and these guards will be manning those weapons, then training requirements should be specified in the contract. I would absolutely insist on some kind of deal where contractors are able to get training in a controlled environment, and then continue that training on these weapon systems while in Afghanistan. Meaning allow them to shoot the weapons, work the ranges with those weapons, and train on the TTP’s with those weapons. The base defense is highly dependent on that guard force to do it’s job. That would mean structure shifts to be smaller, so that there is more time for training. A contract could stipulate 8 hour shifts at the max, which would then give the company time to train while out in the field. The concept of 12 hour shifts does not help at all for training.

Like wise, if posts have special equipment like thermal imagers or military radios, these guards absolutely need to be spun up on this stuff. They should also be versed in a sound action plan for when the base gets attacked, and the contract should require that they do drills and maintain proficiency. With an 8 hour shift scheme, the companies would have plenty of time to do these drills and training. Like I mentioned before, the Camp Bastion attack is an excellent example of stuff a guard force needs to think about and work on.

Final point would be communications. The guard forces, be it military or contractor, need to be talking to one another and interacting. They need integrated communications, and this relationship should be geared towards creating unity of effort and unity of command. The BDOC should absolutely insist on this, and whomever is tasked with spinning up this contract for the Army, should think long and hard about how to structure the contract to meet those ends.

As for the pay and benefits, all I can say there is that if you ‘pay peanuts, you will get monkeys’. I have seen multiple complaints from contractors on how the Camp Leatherneck or Camp Dwyer contracts have materialized. If these contracts are poorly structured, poorly managed, and not given the time to properly set up, then of course things will get screwed up. And if the contract is paying an unreasonably low salary, then the guard force you hire will not have any respect for the job. They will be miserable, and this attitude will permeate throughout the contract. Guys will also jump contract at the first opportunity of a better gig. My advice is to pay a living salary that is respectable in this industry, and structure the leave and shift scheduling that will keep guys around, and not scare them away.

That last part is key. If companies are getting paid for training folks, and are not penalized for pushing contractors out with horrible policies and poor management, then what pops up is a revolving door training scam. The companies will push contractors to the edge with dumb policies so that folks eventually just leave, and then those same companies can train more people and charge the government more money for that. So my advice to the government is to incentivize the company they work with, to keep guys hanging around. The contract should use longevity bonuses, if a contractor stays an ‘x’ amount of days. The contract should also protect the salary of those contractors, so the company can’t play games with the salary. The contract should require paying a higher salary to shift leaders or other small unit leaders, to attract those who would want to do that kind of work. Reward companies for treating their people with respect and setting up excellent systems. Penalize companies that create training schemes, where they push out contractors so they can train more and grow their training business back home. And make damn sure your contracting officer that is assigned to watch this contract, knows what they are doing and actually cares what the company is doing in the field. You need to watch every step of the way, and have plenty of tools to keep that company in check so it does exactly what you want it to do.

My personal preference for a contract, is for the government to stipulate that companies form teams or platoons, where guys are assigned a unit. That way you can actually build some kind of unit cohesion within the contract. True leaders will rise to the top, because they have been forged in that furnace of a team. The current contracts on various bases, where guys are not assigned any team and are just thrown into the mix every time they come back from leave, is idiotic. It doesn’t build unit cohesion, or mutual trust, and folks are constantly having to adapt to a new group of people. It is better to build that trust between individuals through the mechanism of a team or platoon or squad or detail formations, as opposed to constantly breaking up that mutual trust that forms within a unit in a war zone. Teams are also important for mission command to be successful, and if the military is truly focused on implementing mission command within it’s operations, then they should practice what they preach with the formation of contracts that help support that type of structure and culture.

Something to think about for the companies and contracting officers that are reading this. All of this stuff can be spelled out in a contract and implemented by a company. There are other checks and balances that I am missing in this post that I could spend days talking about, but the big one to remember is that a contract should help in the creation of an environment and culture where folks are successful because of the system or contract, and not in spite of it. –Matt

 

Kandahar Airfield is a massive site, and you can see why it would require such a sizable guard force.

 

This Request for Information (RFI) is a market research survey to determine the availability and adequacy of potential sources prior to determining an acquisition and contract strategy to procure Private Security Company (PSC) services in support of U.S. Forces – Afghanistan (US FOR-A) Garrison Command, and tenant organizations at Kandahar Airfield (KAF), Afghanistan. Only  expatriates  from  the  FVEY  (Five  Eyes)   International  Intelligence  Sharing Network Nations (United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) will be permitted to perform work as permanent or temporary residents of Kandahar Airfield under any future contract – no exceptions.  There is a requirement for U.S. Secret level security clearances for supervisory and operations personnel.

This RFI does not constitute a solicitation (Request for Proposal or Request f or Quotation) or a promise to issue a solicitation in the future.   As stipulated in FAR 15.201(e), responses to this notice are not considered offers, shall not be used as a proposal, and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract.    This RFI does not commit the Government to contract for any services whatsoever.   We are not seeking proposals at this time.  Responders are advised that the Government will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in response to this RFI.

The information received will be utilized by RCC-South in developing an acquisition strategy and Purchase Description and Specification.   The information in this notice is based on current information available to date.   This information is subject to change and is not binding to the Government.    Responses to this RFI may or may not be returned.    Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future solicitations, if one is issued.

Any resulting procurement action will be the subject of a separate, future announcement. The proposed acquisition is for services for which the Government intends to solicit and award in conjunction with policies procedures from FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation.

The proposed acquisition is expected to be a firm fixed price contract for a ten (10) month base period, which includes a sixty (45-60) day mobilization period (estimated), and no option periods.   The requirement calls for an approximate of 500-600 guards, armorers, and management  personnel;  no  less  than  30%  of  which  must  be  FVEY  Expatriates,  with  the remaining 70% from an allowable ISAF Troop Contributing Nation: http://www.nato.int/ISAF/structure/nations/index.html

The following information is provided to assist with developing your response:

1.  The government will provide all lodging and office space to meet this requirement. Contractors may have access to MILAIR, DFACs, PX, and MWR.  A contractor man- camp is not required.

2. The contractor shall provide all vehicles, weapons, ammunition, communications equipment, optics, and other equipment necessary to perform the PSC mission.  There will be some government furnished equipment, but this is not relevant to the mobilization questions.

3.   The service is to secure the entirety of Kandahar Airfield (man towers), man/operate ECPs, and conduct roving patrols 24/7 for the specified period of performance.

Interested parties shall submit a response that answers the following questions:

1.  Can you mobilize the required number of personnel, complete with medical screening, vetting and arming authorizations processed, within 45 days of contract award?

2.  If not, what is the maximum number of personnel feasible to mobilize within 45 days of contract award?

3.  Can you mobilize the required number of personnel, complete with medical screening, vetting and arming authorizations processed, within 60 days of contract award?

4.  If not, what is the maximum number of personnel feasible to mobilize within 60 days of contract award?

5.  What is the minimum timeframe feasible for full mobilization of a guard force of approximately 500-600 personnel?

6.  If a phased approach is used for mobilization, please describe the number of personnel and timelines you could reasonably expect to accomplish full operating capability?

7.  What are some of the barriers you anticipate could impact expedited mobilization?

You have the option to present evidence that you are capable of providing the services required and as such your response may contain any information that you feel is relevant.  Please provide an electronic copy of your submitted information to the point of contact theodore.m.epple@swa.army.mil NO LATER THAN 13 October 2014 by 1800 hours EST.

FBO RFI here.

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Industry Talk: FBO–Security Assistance Mentors And Advisors Services In Iraq

This just popped up on my radar screen about Iraq. Of course things have really gotten bad in Iraq with the advance of IS/ISIL/ISIS/Daash and Iraq is having a heck of a time stopping them. Of course this is of grave concern to those that have an interest in a stable Iraq or want the ISIS threat to be stopped.

What is significant here is that contractors are a way to get more ‘boots on the ground’, when politically it is very difficult to do so. Especially when President Obama made promises to the world that we will ‘not’ have soldiers fighting in Iraq, nor will we have ‘boots on the ground’. He also made campaign promises that the US will have nothing to do with Iraq and really trumped up his achievement of pulling all the troops out back in 2011…Well, I guess plans change? lol

At this time, there are several hundred military advisors on the ground, and that number just keeps going up as the situation gets more dire in Iraq. But this also counters the politics of this administration’s views on Iraq involvement. So how do you stop the bleeding in Iraq, but still hold to your promise of not getting involved in Iraq? Enter contractors, the ultimate American Express of contingency operations.

I should also note that contractors are a huge component of security at the Embassy in Baghdad. I have heard estimates thrown around, and given the situation, I would say these are pretty close. Triple Canopy, according to some of my sources, has anywhere from 300 to 350 guys, and SOC has about 200-250 ERT guys. (I am open to any corrections there) That is a pretty substantial force and goes in line with what has been reported over the years in reports. It is also a massive facility, and if ISIS presses the fight closer into the city, those defenses will be tested. That is on top of the current military staffing at the Embassy which was reported to be about 100. As for DoD or OGA contractors, who knows?…

Now back to this FBO. The submission deadline is August 25th, so I imagine all the companies interested will be jumping all over this one and scrambling to put something together. How much this is worth, who knows? This part was interesting thought.

‘The proposed contract is for a single Firm Fixed Price (FFP) DoD contract with a period of performance of twelve (12) months and two (2) twelve month option periods. Security Assistance Mentors and Advisors (SAMA) services in Iraq’.

We will see how this goes and if any other contracts spin up or requests, I will be on the look out. H/T the Washington Post for picking up on this one. –Matt 

 

A police liaison officer, hired by DynCorp to help build the Iraqi police force, walks among the rubble of a police station in 2005 in Fallujah. Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

 

Security Assistance Mentors and Advisors (SAMA) services in Iraq
Solicitation Number: W560MY-14-R-0004
Agency: Department of the Army
Office: Army Contracting Command
Location: ACC – Rock Island (ACC-RI)
Aug 11, 2014
Solicitation Number: W560MY-14-R-0004
Notice Type: Sources Sought
Synopsis:
Added: Aug 11, 2014 10:54 am
SOURCES SOUGHT to locate interested vendors with the capability of performing Security Assistance Mentors and Advisors (SAMA) services in Iraq. The contractor shall provide advice and assistance to the Office of Security Assistance – Iraq (OSC-I) senior personnel in their mission to support the Government of Iraq (GoI), cognizant of the goals of goals of reducing tensions between Arabs and Kurds, and Sunni and Shias, with key focus on core process and systems which involve, but are not limited to administration, force development, procurement and acquisition, contracting, training management, public affairs, logistics, personnel management, professional development, communications, planning and operations, infrastructure management, intelligence and executive development.
Contract personnel shall assist the military and government personnel assigned to OSC-I in the assessment of MoD, CTS, or MoP processes, policies, and systems and then advising, coaching, mentoring, training, and liaising with MoD, CTS, or MoP officials to improve and refine these processes, policies, and systems. The contractor shall also ensure that training facilitation and the degree of interaction between contractor personnel and Iraqis being trained will conform to evolving local Iraqi requirements as may be agreed upon between the contractor and the Contracting Officer.
MISSION STATEMENT: The Office of Security Assistance – Iraq (OSC-I) has a requirement to provide Security Assistance Mentors and Advisors (SAMA) services to mentor and assist the Ministry of Defense (MoD) and the Iraqi Counter Terrorism Service (CTS) to build processes and institutional capacity within the ministry or bureau in order to place them on the critical path towards Iraqi security self-reliance.
(more…)

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Aviation: FBO News–DoS Set To Fire Up A $10 Billion Drug Interdiction Air Services Contract

Filed under: Aviation — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 9:46 PM

The total dollar value of services could reach $10B over the life of the resulting contracts. The Department requests industry feedback into the most effective way to provide these services. An abbreviated list of requirements is presented below.?Operate and Maintain DoS Aircraft Worldwide. DoS currently has 412 aircraft in its inventory. 120 are operational globally for drug interdiction and transport of personnel. 292 aircraft are in flyable or non-flyable storage.
Current locations of performance are in Central Florida, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Guatemala, and Iraq. However, it is anticipated that performance may extend into other worldwide locations and the contractor(s) must be able to quickly extend operations to new locations on short notice, for limited duration. Recent examples of such include Sudan, Honduras, Malta, Libya, and Egypt.

A hat tip to Danger Room for picking up on this one. This is a big contract and it includes all sorts of services and missions that would have to be fulfilled. And like Wired mention, this looks more like a private air force than just a air services contract. lol

So how would this apply to the security folks? Well this quote under the ‘requirements’ section is what perked me up. This would be a task that could potentially be subcontracted or maybe done in house. But either way, it is a security contractor specific task.

Provide defensive security for air fields and housing when required. This may be coordinated through USG security elements, Host Nation elements, or subcontracted, depending on the site and situation.

We will see how it goes. Between this contract and CNTPO, drug interdiction aviation services is quite the money maker, and companies like Dyncorp are well positioned to dominate this sector. –Matt

 

US DEPARTMENT OF STATE AVIATION SUPPORT SERVICES
Solicitation Number: SAQMMA13R0044
Agency: Department of State
Office: Office of Acquisitions
Location: INL Support
Nov 30, 2012
Solicitation Number: SAQMMA13R0044
Notice Type: Sources Sought
Synopsis:
1. INTRODUCTION
The Department of State is sponsoring an Industry Best Practice and Vendor Identification Conference to identify potential business sources with the resources, capabilities, and experience to successfully deliver requisite services to sustain the Department’s Aviation Fleet. The Department staff will present an Air Wing Command Briefing, present functional core and supporting contract requirements with a focus on small business set-asides, provide an open forum to ask questions, and a chance to have a one-on-one session with the Government. Industry should be prepared to discuss innovative solutions, available technology, and capabilities. This conference will be held on January 9 and 10, 2013 in Melbourne, Florida. The location will be provided as an amendment to the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website. ?Following the overview presentations and the open discussion forum on January 9, 2013, the Government will host one-on-one sessions with interested companies, along with their anticipated subcontractor teams, provided prior coordination with the Government is established. The one-on-one sessions give companies a chance to ask specific questions regarding the program that they did not want to share during the presentation. These sessions will be limited to 30 minutes and may begin the afternoon of January 9, 2013 and between 8:00 AM – 5:00 PM on January 10, 2013 (January 11 will be an overflow day if needed). Session times will be assigned and companies will be notified of their time slot via email.

(more…)

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Industry Talk: FBO News– US Trade And Development Agency ‘Definitional Missions’, Libya

Man, they should have done this awhile back. But this is cool none the less. Libya has the money and has plenty of reconstruction projects that companies can assist in. So this is great that the USTDA is making this happen.

Now of course the NTC is still trying to get everyone under the same tent and they will be dealing with internal issues for awhile. But as life normalizes throughout the country and services/jobs are brought back into the fold, then perhaps people will have better things to do than fight amongst each other.

On another note is the strategic use of contractors or private industry. The solicitation even mentions this. Check it out.

The Libyan sectors targeted for review under the new USTDA initiatives are: (1) Oil and Gas; (2) Power Generation; (3) Transportation, and: (4) Information and Communications Technology.
USTDA’s stated purpose behind the sector evaluations is to increase “strategic opportunities for the utilization of U.S. goods, services, and technologies as the country rebuilds its economy…”

‘Oil and gas’ is of utmost strategic importance to the west, and especially Europe. So hemming up those other sectors are key to supporting this oil and gas sector. It’s a little hard for engineers to drive out to the plant, if the roads suck or they can’t make a phone call to arrange a meeting as an example.  All of these sectors help support one another, and together they help in stabilizing the country and getting that oil and gas production humming along. Or at least that is the idea behind this stuff, and private industry is key to make that happen.

Not only that, but a country like Libya is perfect for today’s contingency operations companies. Especially as Iraq or Afghanistan continues to wind down. It is also great for US companies who are wanting to expand their opportunities into other markets, and Libya is prime for that.  Below this first article, I also posted a quick snippet of all four USTDA solicitations on FBO with links. Check it out. –Matt

 

Obama eyes rebuilding business – in AFRICA!
Sending contractors to evaluate plans by National Transitional Council
By Steve Peacock
April 2012
The Obama administration is considering future funding of industry modernization ventures in Libya, and has proposed sending contractors to assess U.S. investment prospects.
Four separate “definitional missions,” or DMs, soon will be carried out by private vendors on behalf of the U.S. Trade & Development Agency, an independent White House entity.
According to planning documents that WND located via routine database research, USTDA has issued Requests for Proposals from contractors capable of identifying and evaluating industry projects that Libya’s National Transitional Council is proposing.
The USTDA-funded missions come at a time when the council is struggling to contain divisive conflicts between tribal and regional militias.
As WND reported last month, the NTC is threatening to use force to keep those opposing forces in check, a move seen by some as necessary to avoid fracturing the nation.

(more…)

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress