FAR 37.109—Services of quasi-military armed forces.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 37.109 implements the statutory prohibition in 5 U.S.C. 3108 against contracting with “Pinkerton Detective Agencies or similar organizations.” In practical terms, this section tells agencies and contractors when a services contract is barred because the vendor is essentially offering a quasi-military armed force for hire, and when it is not barred even if the contractor provides armed guards, protective services, or general investigative/detective services. The section is narrow but important: it protects the government from using private organizations that function like mercenary or paramilitary forces, while allowing ordinary security and investigative services that do not rise to that level. It also clarifies that the prohibition applies to contracts with the organization itself or its employees, regardless of how the contract is labeled or structured. For contracting officers, the key practical task is to look past the contract title and evaluate the nature of the organization and the services being offered. For contractors, the main significance is understanding that armed security work is not automatically prohibited, but a quasi-military character can make the arrangement unlawful.
Key Rules
Statutory prohibition applies
The government may not contract with “Pinkerton Detective Agencies or similar organizations” under 5 U.S.C. 3108. This is a legal prohibition, not a discretionary policy, so if the organization falls within the prohibited category, the contract cannot be awarded.
Focus on quasi-military forces
The prohibition applies only to organizations that offer quasi-military armed forces for hire, or to their employees. The key question is whether the contractor is essentially supplying an armed force-like capability, not merely providing labor or services.
Contract form does not matter
The ban applies regardless of the contract’s character. Agencies cannot avoid the prohibition by calling the arrangement a different type of services contract if the underlying provider is a prohibited organization.
Guard services are not automatically barred
An organization that provides guard or protective services is not, by that fact alone, a quasi-military armed force. The same is true even if the guards are armed, so ordinary security contracts are not prohibited merely because weapons are involved.
Investigative services are not automatically barred
An organization that provides general investigative or detective services is also not automatically covered by the prohibition. The organization becomes prohibited only if it crosses the line into offering quasi-military armed forces for hire.
Case law informs interpretation
The reference to 57 Comp. Gen. 524 signals that the prohibition should be read narrowly and based on the actual nature of the organization and services. Agencies should use that interpretive guidance when deciding whether a vendor is within the banned category.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Determine whether the prospective contractor is a prohibited quasi-military organization before award. The contracting officer must look beyond the contract label and assess the vendor’s actual business model, services, and organizational character to ensure compliance with 5 U.S.C. 3108.
Agency
Ensure procurement policies and reviews prevent awards to prohibited organizations. The agency should support contracting personnel with legal and acquisition review when a vendor’s security, armed protection, or investigative activities raise a question under this section.
Contractor
Avoid marketing or structuring services in a way that makes the organization appear to be a quasi-military armed force for hire. Contractors should understand that ordinary guard, protective, or investigative services are not automatically prohibited, but they must not present themselves as a mercenary or paramilitary organization.
Legal Counsel / Acquisition Review Officials
Provide interpretation when the organization’s status is unclear. Counsel should help distinguish lawful security or investigative services from prohibited quasi-military armed force arrangements, especially where armed personnel, tactical capabilities, or military-style operations are involved.
Practical Implications
Contracting officers must evaluate substance over form; a services contract is not safe just because it is labeled as security, investigative, or protective services.
Armed guards are not automatically disqualifying, but the overall organization may still be prohibited if it offers a force-like capability for hire.
The biggest pitfall is assuming that any private security or detective firm is barred; FAR 37.109 is narrower than that and requires a specific quasi-military character.
Another common risk is trying to “paper over” a prohibited arrangement by changing the contract type or wording; the prohibition applies regardless of the contract’s character.
When there is doubt, agencies should seek legal review before award, because an improper award could violate a statutory prohibition and create procurement and performance problems.
Official Regulatory Text
Contracts with "Pinkerton Detective Agencies or similar organizations" are prohibited by 5 U.S.C. 3108 . This prohibition applies only to contracts with organizations that offer quasi-military armed forces for hire, or with their employees, regardless of the contract’s character. An organization providing guard or protective services does not thereby become a "quasi-military armed force," even though the guards are armed or the organization provides general investigative or detective services. (See 57 Comp. Gen. 524.)