DIA Outsources a Record $1 billion+ of Intel Services

I'm on vacation, but a report today in the Washington Post was enough to lure me away from my kneeboard and back to the keyboard:

The Defense Intelligence Agency is preparing to pay private contractors up to $1 billion to conduct core intelligence tasks of analysis and collection over the next five years, an amount that would set a record in the outsourcing of such functions by the Pentagon's top spying agency.

While it's a jaw-dropping figure, it's not surprising given the Director of National Intelligence's emphasis upon acquisitions.  (See "The ODNI's Wal-Mart Approach to Intel.")  But it does fly in the face of the DNI's public statements.  For example, Ronald P. Sanders, Associate Director of National Intelligence wrote in response to my July Washington Post article:

Our workforce has recovered to the point that we can begin to shed some contract personnel or shift them away from core mission areas...

One billion plus dollars of intel contracting seems less like shedding and more like a Sumo wrestler gorging himself before a match. 

I was unable to quickly find the DIA announcement of the contract (and would appreciate the link from readers who find it), however, the WaPo article gives a few clues about the contract:

The DIA did not specify exactly what it wants the contractors to do but said it is seeking teams to fulfill "operational and mission requirements" that include intelligence "Gathering and Collection, Analysis, Utilization, and Strategy and Support."  It holds out the possibility that five or more contractors may be hired ...

Translated, this means broad, soup to nuts intel work, from running agents to creating those analytical products that get funneled into the President's Daily Brief--anything the DIA can conceive of. 

On the upside, if they are able to pull in some of the contractors who are currently doing work for the CIA, the overall quality of Defense Intel could be improved.

Holding out the possibility that five or more contractors could be hired for such indefinite tasks strongly suggests this is some form of an IDIQ contact vehicle--Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity  In all likelihood, it means the $1 billion plus of contracts is already targeted for the primes such as Booz Allen Hamilton, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, SAIC and probably Scitor, maybe also Raytheon.  (Sorry Abraxas--just be grateful you can still hold your own at the NCS...)

The smaller firms will be forced to line up with one of the primes who will largely control their fate for the life of the contract.  It also suggests there will be layered management structures, with contractors overseeing contractors from other firms with limited government oversight.  But hey, it works for satellites and human intel gathering and analysis really aren't that different--just ask the DNI and D/CIA...

And at this point the DIA isn't sure what it wants to contract for, only that it intends to outsource a billion dollars of services and it has to go through the motions of an RFP to meet Federal Acquisition Rules (FAR) requirements to give the appearance of an open competition that is, in reality, anything but. 

Even though it seems at this point the DIA doesn't entirely understand its needs, rest assured that soon after the award, the primes and subs will rush to their DIA contracts and show them exactly what it is that they have been looking for all along, how their firms can provide that precise service and just how easily it can be procured now that the "competitive" bidding is out of the way. This happens in part because the expertise to understand the intel services and even the intelligence needs has been lost to government as expertise has migrated to the private sector.  And this loss is guaranteed to accelerate since so many green dollars are being thrown into the DIA which is already heavily outsourced.

So will the DIA get what it really needs through such a procurement system that gives contractors the power to define the Pentagon's intelligence needs?  Unfortunately, the 800-pound gorilla of the Intel Community will never know because it's outsourced its brains. 

Pass the bananas--or rather issue a task order to Halliburton for a bunch.

Comments

[GDAEman]

Sorry for the extensive quote from Naomi Klein, but reading your piece reminded me of it, and it seems relevant.

Discussing the "bold evolution of market logic" that followed 9/11, Klein says:

"Rather than the ’90s approach of selling off existing public companies, like water and electricity, the Bush team was creating a whole new framework for its actions. That framework was and is the war on terror, which was built to be private, privately managed from the start. The Bush administration played the role of a kind of a venture capitalist for the startup security companies, and they created an economic boom on par with the dotcom boom of the 1990s. But we didn’t talk about it, because we were too busy talking about security."

"Now, this feat required a kind of two-stage process, which was using 9/11, of course, to radically increase the surveillance and security powers of the state, concentrated in the executive branch, but at the same time to take those powers and outsource them to a web of private companies, whether Blackwater, Boeing, AT&T, Halliburton, Bechtel, the Carlyle Group. Now, in the ’80s, the goal of privatization -- and in the ’90s -- was devouring the appendages of the state. But what was happening now is it was the core that was being devoured, because what is more central to the very definition of a state of a government than security and disaster response? Now, this is one of the great ironies of the war on terror, is that it proved such an effective weapon to furthering the corporate agenda precisely because it denied that it has, and continues to deny that it has, a corporate agenda at all."

[Jeff Carr]

Hi RJ: Your question about where the DIA made their preliminary announcement intrigued me, so I spent about an hour scouring the federal procurement sites and couldn't find the announcement. DIA has used http://www.fedbizopps.gov and http://techtransfer.gsfc.nasa.gov/funding-opps.html#dia
The latter is from the Virginia Contracting Activity (VACA) which seems to be DIA's primary outlet for contracting requests, but I couldn't find what the WashPo writer called a "preliminary announcement".

[Retired]

I see your $billion and raise you????? C'mon, Hqs, bring Dusty back and let's get into the game. Break out the Cohibas!

[Mad Dogs]

Howdy RJ,

Have you checked this "Solutions for Intelligence Analysis (SIA) Support" here:

http://www.fbo.gov/spg/ODA/DIA/ZD50A/HHM402-07-R-0087/SynopsisP.html

DIA, on its website states that it does its contracting "through the Virginia Contracting Activity, also known as VACA, which is a vital element of the Office of the Acquisition Executive (AE). Through VACA, DIA acquires the necessary products and services required to support its combat support mission."

I then chased the above link down through the DIA's website where they referenced the Federal Business Opportunities Website (www.fedbizopps.gov).

[R J Hillhouse]

Thanks.

I already had rounded up the usual suspects and no joy.

RJH

[Jeffrey Carr]

Slightly off the topic, but I thought you'd appreciate the following bit of info from Secrecy News:

"A more ambitious and unprecedented declassification action is the congressional requirement to disclose the amount of the 2007 National Intelligence Program budget, which must be declassified and released by October 30. No exercise of discretion is permitted."

Here's a link to the documents:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2007_cr/hr1-intel.html

You've gotta love FAS.org.

[John]

You left off General Dynamics who is still heavily involved with DIA and their favorite partner. I know because my small biz company felt the sting of their partnership recently.