Army contract for Vicksburg building construction awarded at $53.1M, exceeding initial estimates

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $53,104,014 ($53.1M)

Contractor: W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-02-03

End Date: 2018-02-09

Contract Duration: 1,102 days

Daily Burn Rate: $48.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF ERDC HQ BLDG, VICKSBURG, MS

Place of Performance

Location: VICKSBURG, WARREN County, MISSISSIPPI, 39180

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $53.1 million to W. G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF ERDC HQ BLDG, VICKSBURG, MS Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair, with a final cost slightly above initial projections. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a robust bidding process, potentially driving competitive pricing. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, given the fixed-price nature of the contract. 4. Performance context shows a multi-year project duration. 5. Sector positioning is within the commercial and institutional building construction domain.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The final award amount of $53.1 million for the ERDC HQ building in Vicksburg, MS, represents a significant investment. While specific initial estimates are not provided, the contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a degree of market validation. Benchmarking against similar large-scale institutional construction projects would be necessary for a more precise value assessment, but the firm fixed-price structure aims to control costs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant construction project. This competitive environment is generally favorable for price discovery and achieving a reasonable market price.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from the competitive bidding process, which is designed to ensure that the government receives the best possible price for the construction services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its personnel at the ERDC HQ in Vicksburg, Mississippi, who will occupy the new facility. The contract delivers a new headquarters building, likely encompassing office space, laboratories, and support facilities. The geographic impact is concentrated in Vicksburg, Mississippi, supporting local economic activity through construction jobs and material sourcing. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, architects, and related trades in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions or material price fluctuations occur, despite the fixed-price nature.
Delays in construction could impact the operational readiness and efficiency of the ERDC HQ.
Ensuring compliance with all environmental and building codes throughout the construction process requires diligent oversight.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive market was leveraged to secure favorable pricing.
The project duration of over 1000 days indicates a substantial and well-planned undertaking.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building of non-residential structures such as government facilities, educational institutions, and commercial offices. Spending in this area is often driven by government infrastructure needs and private sector development. Comparable benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per square foot or per project for similar federal or large-scale institutional buildings.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract, as 'sb' is false. There is no explicit information on subcontracting goals for small businesses. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether the prime contractor, W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company, utilizes small businesses for any portion of the subcontracted work.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the relevant Army Corps of Engineers district. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, with penalties for non-performance or delays. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed project progress reports may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Federal Building Construction
Army Corps of Engineers Projects
Research and Development Facilities Construction

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation if not managed tightly.
Risk of construction delays impacting operational timelines.
Need for robust quality assurance to meet building standards.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $53.1 million to W. G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. IGF::OT::IGF ERDC HQ BLDG, VICKSBURG, MS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is W. G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION 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 $53.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-02-03. End: 2018-02-09.

What was the initial estimated cost for this project, and how did the final award compare?

The provided data does not include the initial estimated cost for the ERDC HQ building construction. The final award amount was $53,104,014.11. Without the initial estimate, a direct comparison to assess cost growth or savings is not possible. However, the fact that it was awarded under full and open competition with 3 bidders suggests that the final price was competitive within the market at the time of award. Further investigation into pre-solicitation documents or agency budget justifications might reveal the original cost projections.

What is the track record of W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company has a history of performing work for the federal government, including significant contracts with the Department of Defense. While this specific contract for the ERDC HQ building is a notable award, their broader portfolio likely includes various construction projects for military branches and other federal agencies. Analyzing their past performance ratings, contract completion history, and any past performance issues or commendations would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and capability as a federal contractor. A review of their award history would indicate their experience with similar project types and scales.

How does the cost per square foot of this project compare to similar federal building construction projects?

To compare the cost per square foot, the total square footage of the ERDC HQ building would be required. Assuming this information were available, it could be benchmarked against similar federal institutional or laboratory construction projects awarded around the same period. Factors such as specialized laboratory requirements, high-security features, or unique architectural designs can significantly influence cost per square foot. A preliminary analysis suggests the contract value of $53.1 million is substantial, indicating a large or complex facility. A detailed comparison would necessitate access to project blueprints and specifications to ensure like-for-like analysis.

What are the key performance metrics and milestones associated with this construction contract?

The primary performance metric for this contract is the successful completion of the ERDC HQ building according to the specified design, quality standards, and within the agreed-upon timeframe. Key milestones would typically include site preparation, foundation completion, structural erection, enclosure, interior fit-out, and final commissioning. The contract duration of 1102 days (approximately 3 years) suggests a phased approach to these milestones. Performance would be monitored by the COR, with potential penalties for significant delays or deviations from specifications. Successful completion would lead to final payment and contract closeout.

What is the historical spending trend for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army in Mississippi?

Analyzing historical spending trends for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army in Mississippi would require accessing a broader dataset of Army contracts within the state. This specific contract represents a significant single award. Trends might indicate an increasing or decreasing investment in infrastructure and facilities in the region. Factors influencing these trends could include military readiness needs, base realignment and closure actions, and federal infrastructure funding allocations. A comprehensive review would involve examining contract databases for the past 5-10 years, filtering by agency, geography, and construction type.

Were there any significant challenges or disputes during the execution of this contract?

Information regarding specific challenges or disputes during the execution of this contract is not readily available in the provided data. Federal contract execution can encounter issues such as unforeseen site conditions, material shortages, labor disputes, or design changes, which may lead to change orders or claims. The firm fixed-price nature of this contract implies that the contractor bears most of the risk for cost overruns, potentially leading to disputes if significant unforeseen issues arise. A thorough review of contract modification history and any associated litigation or claims would be necessary to identify such challenges.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W9127811R0019

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Yates Companies Inc (UEI: 017041232)

Address: ONE GULLY AVE, PHILADELPHIA, MS, 39350

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $53,104,014

Exercised Options: $53,104,014

Current Obligation: $53,104,014

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9127812D0040

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline