DoD's $23.3M Barracks Construction Contract Awarded to Caddell Construction for Fort Sill Facilities

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,267,714 ($23.3M)

Contractor: Caddell Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-06-25

End Date: 2011-11-30

Contract Duration: 1,619 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION OF AIT BARRACK FACILITIES

Place of Performance

Location: FORT SILL, COMANCHE County, OKLAHOMA, 73503

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.3 million to CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCTION OF AIT BARRACK FACILITIES Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 4. Project duration of over four years indicates a substantial construction undertaking. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Army, highlighting defense infrastructure priorities. 6. Location in Oklahoma places the project within a specific regional context.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $23.3 million for barracks construction appears within a reasonable range for a project of this scale and duration. Without specific benchmarks for similar barracks construction projects in the region or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the firm fixed-price structure suggests an effort to manage cost overruns, which is a positive indicator for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of four bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While not an exceptionally high number, it provides a basis for price discovery and allows the government to select the most advantageous offer.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and better quality services.

Public Impact

Benefits military personnel by providing improved housing facilities at Fort Sill. Delivers essential construction services to enhance the quality of life for soldiers. Geographic impact is concentrated in Oklahoma, supporting local construction employment. Workforce implications include jobs for construction workers, engineers, and project managers.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if initial estimates did not fully capture project complexities.
Risk of schedule delays due to the multi-year duration and potential unforeseen construction challenges.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a structured procurement process.
Award to an established contractor like Caddell Construction implies a degree of reliability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this area often supports military readiness, housing, and other institutional needs. Benchmarking against similar military construction projects would provide further context on the pricing and efficiency of this award.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary contractor, Caddell Construction, will likely manage the majority of the work, with potential for some subcontracting opportunities that are not specifically mandated for small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which places the onus on the contractor to deliver within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific oversight details are not provided.

Related Government Programs

Military Barracks Construction
Department of Defense Facilities
Army Corps of Engineers Projects
Fort Sill Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Potential for schedule delays due to project duration.
Risk of quality compromises if contractor faces cost pressures.
Dependence on contractor's past performance for successful execution.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.3 million to CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. CONSTRUCTION OF AIT BARRACK FACILITIES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $23.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-06-25. End: 2011-11-30.

What is Caddell Construction Co., Inc.'s track record with similar federal construction projects, particularly for military barracks?

Caddell Construction Co., Inc. has a significant history of performing large-scale construction projects for the federal government, including numerous projects for the Department of Defense and other agencies. Their portfolio often includes military family housing, barracks, and other institutional facilities. A review of their past performance on similar contracts would reveal their ability to manage complex projects, adhere to schedules, and maintain quality standards. While specific details on past barracks projects are not provided here, their extensive experience suggests a capacity to handle this type of work. Their track record is generally considered strong, with a focus on government and institutional clients.

How does the awarded amount of $23.3 million compare to the average cost of constructing military barracks of similar size and scope?

Determining the precise average cost for constructing military barracks of similar size and scope requires detailed project specifications, including square footage, number of occupants, amenities, and specific construction standards (e.g., LEED certification). However, $23.3 million for a multi-year barracks project is a substantial investment. Without comparative data on the number of units or total capacity this contract will provide, it's difficult to benchmark accurately. Generally, barracks construction costs can range widely, from tens of thousands to over a hundred thousand dollars per bed, depending on these factors. This contract's value suggests a significant facility is being built.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this firm fixed-price contract for barracks construction?

The primary risk indicator for a firm fixed-price contract, even with a reputable contractor, is the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability if costs escalate unexpectedly. For a multi-year construction project like barracks, risks also include unforeseen site conditions, material price volatility (though less of a risk for the government in a fixed-price contract), labor shortages, and potential design changes. The duration of the contract (over four years) increases the exposure to these risks. However, the government's risk is primarily limited to the agreed-upon price, assuming adequate oversight is in place to ensure contract compliance.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' strategy in ensuring value for money for this specific barracks construction project?

The 'full and open competition' strategy is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in federal contracting, as it theoretically allows the widest possible pool of qualified contractors to bid. This competition drives down prices and encourages innovation. In this case, with four bidders, there was a degree of competition that likely helped the Department of the Army secure a reasonable price. However, the true measure of value for money also depends on the quality of the final product and adherence to schedule and budget. Effective source selection and robust oversight are crucial complements to the competition strategy.

What are the historical spending patterns for barracks construction within the Department of the Army, and how does this contract fit?

The Department of the Army consistently allocates significant funds towards military construction, including barracks, to maintain and upgrade its infrastructure across numerous installations. Historical spending patterns show a continuous need for new barracks due to aging facilities, increased troop levels, and evolving quality-of-life standards. This $23.3 million contract for Fort Sill fits within this pattern as a necessary investment in troop housing. Annual spending on military construction can fluctuate based on budget appropriations and strategic priorities, but barracks remain a core component of infrastructure investment.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2700 LAGOON PARK DR, MONTGOMERY, AL, 02

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $43,944,773

Exercised Options: $43,944,773

Current Obligation: $23,267,714

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9126G07D0029

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline