DoD's $28.5M Clinic Repair Contract Awarded to J.E. Dunn Construction for Whiteman AFB

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,463,333 ($28.5M)

Contractor: J. E. Dunn Construction Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-09-26

End Date: 2018-01-11

Contract Duration: 1,203 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF WHITEMAN AFB DESIGN&BUILD CLINIC REPAIRS

Place of Performance

Location: WHITEMAN AFB, JOHNSON County, MISSOURI, 65305

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $28.5 million to J. E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF WHITEMAN AFB DESIGN&BUILD CLINIC REPAIRS Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in military healthcare infrastructure. 2. The project was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability. 4. The duration of the contract (over 3 years) indicates a substantial scope of work. 5. The project is located in Missouri, impacting local construction workforce and economy. 6. The contract was awarded as a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $28.5 million for clinic repairs at Whiteman AFB appears reasonable given the scope of construction and the typical costs associated with large-scale facility upgrades. Benchmarking against similar military construction projects would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an effort to manage costs effectively, though the final cost is dependent on the contractor's execution. Without specific details on the scope of repairs, a definitive value assessment is challenging, but the award through full and open competition implies a degree of market validation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and potentially better value for the government. However, the specific nature and complexity of the clinic repairs may have limited the pool of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and encourage innovation, leading to better use of public funds.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families at Whiteman Air Force Base will benefit from improved healthcare facilities. The project delivers essential repairs and upgrades to a critical medical infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. The construction activities will likely involve and support the local construction workforce and related trades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this sector supports the maintenance and development of government facilities, including critical infrastructure like military clinics. The market for large-scale construction projects is often characterized by a mix of large, established firms and specialized subcontractors. The value of this contract, approximately $28.5 million, places it in the mid-to-large range for individual federal construction awards.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). J. E. Dunn Construction Company is a large, established firm. While there is no direct small business set-aside, there is potential for subcontracting opportunities for small businesses within the construction trades, depending on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the specific needs of the project. The impact on the small business ecosystem would be indirect, through potential subcontracting roles.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant agency (Department of the Army). The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability for the contractor to deliver the project within the agreed-upon cost. Performance monitoring and inspection during construction are standard oversight mechanisms. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, whiteman-afb, missouri, full-and-open-competition, firm-fixed-price, delivery-order, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, large-project

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $28.5 million to J. E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. IGF::OT::IGF WHITEMAN AFB DESIGN&BUILD CLINIC REPAIRS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J. E. DUNN 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 $28.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-09-26. End: 2018-01-11.

What is the track record of J. E. Dunn Construction Company with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

J. E. Dunn Construction Company has a significant history of working with the federal government, including numerous contracts with the Department of Defense and other agencies. Their portfolio often includes large-scale construction and renovation projects for military installations, healthcare facilities, and other government buildings. Analyzing their past performance on similar projects, including adherence to schedule, budget, and quality standards, is crucial for assessing their reliability on this specific clinic repair contract. Federal procurement databases and past performance reviews would provide detailed insights into their track record, highlighting any instances of exceptional performance or challenges encountered on previous federal engagements.

How does the awarded price of $28.5 million compare to similar clinic repair projects at other military installations?

Benchmarking this $28.5 million contract against similar clinic repair projects at other military installations requires access to detailed cost data for comparable projects. Factors such as the size of the facility, the scope of repairs (e.g., structural, MEP, interior finishes), the age of the building, and geographic location significantly influence project costs. Generally, larger and more complex renovations in higher cost-of-living areas tend to be more expensive. Without specific comparable project data, it's difficult to definitively state if this award represents excellent, fair, or questionable value. However, the fact that it was awarded under full and open competition suggests the price was deemed reasonable within the competitive market at the time of award.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract for clinic repairs?

The primary risk with a firm fixed-price contract, while beneficial for cost control, lies in potential unforeseen issues that could increase the contractor's costs. For clinic repairs, these could include discovering hazardous materials (like asbestos or lead paint), structural deficiencies not apparent during the initial inspection, or complex mechanical/electrical system problems. If these issues significantly increase the contractor's costs beyond what was anticipated, it could lead to pressure for change orders or, in extreme cases, contractor default. The government's risk is mitigated by thorough pre-bid site assessments and clear contract specifications, but the contractor bears the brunt of cost overruns due to unforeseen conditions.

How effective are firm fixed-price contracts in ensuring program effectiveness for construction projects like this?

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally considered effective for construction projects when the scope of work is well-defined and risks are understood. For clinic repairs, an FFP contract incentivizes the contractor to complete the work efficiently and within budget, as they assume the risk of cost overruns. This can lead to timely project completion and predictable costs for the government. However, effectiveness can be diminished if the scope is poorly defined, leading to numerous change orders that negate the fixed-price benefit, or if the contractor cuts corners on quality to maintain profitability. Robust oversight and clear contract administration are essential to ensure both cost control and the desired level of quality and effectiveness.

What are the historical spending patterns for clinic repairs or similar construction projects at Whiteman AFB or within the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for clinic repairs and similar construction projects at Whiteman AFB and across the Department of the Army (DoA) provides context for the $28.5 million award. Federal spending on military facility maintenance and upgrades is typically substantial and ongoing, driven by the need to modernize aging infrastructure and ensure operational readiness. Patterns often reveal cyclical investments in major renovations, specific types of facilities (like barracks or medical centers), and responses to infrastructure assessments. Understanding the frequency and magnitude of past investments in medical facilities at Whiteman AFB, or similar bases, can help determine if this contract represents a typical expenditure, a significant upgrade, or a response to a specific need or backlog.

What is the potential impact of this contract on the local construction market in Missouri?

A contract of this magnitude ($28.5 million) awarded to a prime contractor like J. E. Dunn Construction Company can have a notable impact on the local construction market in Missouri. It signifies a significant injection of capital into the regional economy. The prime contractor will likely engage local subcontractors for various trades (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, etc.) and procure materials from local suppliers, creating jobs and generating revenue. Furthermore, the project's duration (over three years) suggests sustained economic activity. The demand for skilled labor could also increase, potentially leading to higher wages and opportunities for workforce development within the local construction sector.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ConstructionNonresidential Building ConstructionCommercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTYMAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W9127S13R6008

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: JE Dunn Construction Group Inc (UEI: 007836448)

Address: 1001 LOCUST, KANSAS CITY, MO, 64106

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,463,333

Exercised Options: $28,463,333

Current Obligation: $28,463,333

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 60

Total Subaward Amount: $85,656,774

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9127S13D6001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2014-09-26

Current End Date: 2018-01-11

Potential End Date: 2018-01-11 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-02-26

More Contracts from J. E. Dunn Construction Company

View all J. E. Dunn Construction Company federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending