Army awards $45.7M for facility maintenance and construction in Kansas, highlighting firm-fixed-price contract
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $45,712,284 ($45.7M)
Contractor: M. a. Mortenson Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2007-08-23
End Date: 2009-02-15
Contract Duration: 542 days
Daily Burn Rate: $84.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 13
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: VECH. MAINT. & COF FACILITIES, EC-KR
Place of Performance
Location: FORT RILEY, GEARY County, KANSAS, 66442
State: Kansas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $45.7 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY for work described as: VECH. MAINT. & COF FACILITIES, EC-KR Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Firm-fixed-price contract type indicates price certainty for the government. 3. The contract duration of 542 days (approx. 1.5 years) provides a defined period for services. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Army, indicating a focus on defense infrastructure. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction. 6. The contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company, has a track record with federal contracts. 7. The contract was awarded in 2007, with completion in 2009, providing historical performance data.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The award amount of $45.7 million for facility maintenance and construction appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this scope and duration, given the historical context of federal construction contracts. Benchmarking against similar Department of Defense projects for facility maintenance and construction in the late 2000s would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure helps control costs, but the overall value is contingent on the quality of work and adherence to the original scope.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 13 bids suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement. A higher number of bidders generally indicates a more robust market and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The extensive competition for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.
Public Impact
The Department of the Army benefits from the maintenance and construction of its facilities, ensuring operational readiness. Services delivered include facility maintenance and construction, crucial for maintaining military infrastructure. The geographic impact is primarily in Kansas, where the facilities are located. The contract supports jobs within the construction sector, including skilled trades and project management.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price contract did not adequately account for all potential construction challenges.
- Risk of schedule delays impacting facility availability if unforeseen issues arise during the construction period.
- Dependence on a single contractor for a significant period could limit flexibility if needs change.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
- Full and open competition with 13 bidders suggests a competitive market and potentially better pricing.
- The contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company, is an established entity in the construction industry.
Sector Analysis
The commercial and institutional building construction sector is a significant part of the U.S. economy, encompassing a wide range of projects from office buildings to public facilities. Federal spending in this sector, particularly for defense infrastructure, is substantial. This contract fits within the broader category of government construction services, which often involves large-scale projects requiring specialized expertise and adherence to strict building codes and security requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large federal construction contracts awarded around the same period.
Small Business Impact
The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business, and the impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether M. A. Mortenson Company utilized small business subcontractors, which is not detailed here.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and their representatives within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance
- Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
- Federal Building Construction
- Military Base Infrastructure
Risk Flags
- Contract awarded in 2007, performance completed in 2009; data may not reflect current market conditions or contractor performance.
- Limited detail on specific project scope and deliverables beyond general 'maintenance and construction'.
Tags
construction, facility-maintenance, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, kansas, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, defense-infrastructure
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $45.7 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY. VECH. MAINT. & COF FACILITIES, EC-KR
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $45.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-08-23. End: 2009-02-15.
What is the track record of M. A. Mortenson Company with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?
M. A. Mortenson Company has a significant history of working with federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their portfolio includes a variety of construction and facility management projects for military branches and other government entities. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, including any reported issues or successes, would provide further insight into their reliability and capability. Federal procurement data often shows multiple awards to established contractors like Mortenson, indicating a level of trust and proven performance in delivering complex projects within government requirements and timelines.
How does the $45.7 million award compare to similar facility maintenance and construction contracts awarded by the Department of the Army around 2007-2009?
Benchmarking the $45.7 million award requires comparing it to similar Department of the Army contracts for facility maintenance and construction executed between 2007 and 2009. Factors such as project scope, duration, location, and specific services (e.g., new construction vs. renovation, specialized maintenance) are critical for a meaningful comparison. Without access to a detailed database of comparable contracts, it's challenging to provide a precise benchmark. However, for a project spanning approximately 1.5 years and involving significant construction and maintenance, $45.7 million represents a substantial investment, suggesting a project of considerable scale and complexity.
What were the primary risks identified for this contract, and how were they mitigated?
The primary risks for a large construction and facility maintenance contract typically include cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions or material price fluctuations, schedule delays caused by weather or supply chain issues, and performance deficiencies. For this firm-fixed-price contract, the risk of cost overruns was largely borne by the contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company. Mitigation strategies would have included thorough site investigations prior to bidding, detailed project planning, robust scheduling, and quality assurance protocols. The government's mitigation would involve careful contract oversight, clear performance standards, and potentially liquidated damages clauses for delays.
How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring a competitive price for this contract?
The fact that this contract was awarded under full and open competition with 13 bids suggests a strong likelihood of competitive pricing. When multiple qualified contractors vie for a project, they are incentivized to submit their most competitive offers to win the award. The government benefits from this competitive dynamic through potentially lower prices than might be achieved through sole-source or limited competition. While the exact price savings cannot be determined without a baseline or comparison, the high number of bidders is a positive indicator of effective price discovery in the procurement process.
What is the historical spending trend for facility maintenance and construction by the Department of the Army in Kansas?
Analyzing the historical spending trend for facility maintenance and construction by the Department of the Army in Kansas requires access to multi-year federal procurement data specific to that geographic region and agency. This particular contract represents a significant single award in that category for the period it covers. To understand the trend, one would need to aggregate spending on similar NAICS codes (like 236220) and contract types within Kansas over several fiscal years. This would reveal whether spending in this area has been consistent, increasing, or decreasing, and how this $45.7 million award fits into the broader pattern.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Solicitation ID: W912DQ07R0013
Offers Received: 13
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: M. a. Mortenson Companies, Inc. (UEI: 130731797)
Address: 700 MEADOW LN N, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $49,577,284
Exercised Options: $45,712,284
Current Obligation: $45,712,284
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W912DQ07D0053
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-08-23
Current End Date: 2009-02-15
Potential End Date: 2009-02-15 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2009-01-16
More Contracts from M. a. Mortenson Company
- TAS::47 4543::TAS Modernization of the Byron G. Rogers Federal Office Building and the Byron G. Rogers Federal Courthouse Window Replacement in Denver, CO — $160.4M (General Services Administration)
- Construction Contract 2 for the Dept. of State, Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (fastc) in Blackstone, VA. Includes an Indoor Firing Range, Indoor/Outdoor Tactical Range, Tactical Training Building, Office and Classroom Building, Driving Tracks, Mock Urban Driving Track and Mock Embassy — $154.6M (General Services Administration)
- Clin 0001 Base BID Repair EHW 1 Phase 2 NSB Kings BAY GA — $154.6M (Department of Defense)
- Design-Build-Bridging Construction Services for the Modernization of the U.S. National Poultry Research Center (usnprc), Seprl Campus in Athens, GA This IS a Two-Phase Design-Build Acquisition. ONE Solicitation Covers Both Phases. Phase I IS the Pre-Selection Phase in Which the Government Will "shortlist" Maximum of (4) of the Most Highly Qualified Offerors. Only Those Firms Selected in Phase I Will BE Allowed to Continue to the Phase II. Detailed Design Criteria Will Then BE Added by Amendment to the Solicitation to Start the Phase II Stage of the Request for Proposals. Each Firm Selected for Participation in Phase II Will Then Submit a Design-Build Technical Proposal, the Remainder of the Performance Capability Proposal and Price Proposal. Igf::ot::igf — $149.6M (Department of Agriculture)
- Ibct — $141.3M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)