Dod's $15.5M Construction Contract for Construct Company Operations Facility Awarded to M. a. Mortenson Company
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $15,516,193 ($15.5M)
Contractor: M. a. Mortenson Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-09-28
End Date: 2011-10-31
Contract Duration: 763 days
Daily Burn Rate: $20.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: CONSTRUCT COMPANY OPERATIONS FACILITY
Place of Performance
Location: FORT WORTH, TARRANT County, TEXAS, 76102
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $15.5 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY for work described as: CONSTRUCT COMPANY OPERATIONS FACILITY Key points: 1. The contract was awarded using full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The firm fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. 3. The contract duration of 763 days (over two years) suggests a significant scope of work. 4. The award was made by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense. 5. The facility is located in Texas, indicating a specific geographic focus for this construction project. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this specific construction contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar facilities. The total award amount of $15.5 million for a commercial and institutional building construction project over two years appears within a reasonable range for large-scale construction. However, a deeper analysis of the cost per square foot or per unit of construction would be necessary to definitively assess value for money.
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 3 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While three bidders provide some price discovery, a higher number of bids would typically lead to more robust competition and potentially lower prices for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The competitive bidding process for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source award. However, the moderate number of bidders means there may have been opportunities for even greater cost savings.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of Defense and the U.S. Army, who will receive a new operations facility. The services delivered include the construction of a commercial and institutional building. The geographic impact is concentrated in Texas, where the facility will be built. The project will likely create jobs in the construction sector within Texas, benefiting local and regional workforces.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arise, although the firm fixed-price contract mitigates this for the government.
- Delays in construction could impact the operational readiness of the facility for the Department of the Army.
- Quality control during construction is crucial to ensure the facility meets all operational and safety standards.
Positive Signals
- The use of firm fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
- Full and open competition suggests a deliberate effort to secure the best value through a competitive process.
- The award to a known entity like M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY may indicate a level of confidence in their ability to execute the project.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. The market for government construction projects is substantial, with agencies like the Department of Defense frequently undertaking large-scale building initiatives. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot for similar government or commercial facilities built in the same region and time period.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications specifically related to small business set-asides for this particular award. The impact on the small business ecosystem would be indirect, potentially through opportunities for small businesses to subcontract with the prime contractor, M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY, if they choose to do so.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant project management office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures would include adherence to the contract terms, specifications, and delivery schedule. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction may apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Defense Construction Projects
- Army Facilities Management
- Commercial Building Construction Contracts
- Large-Scale Infrastructure Development
Risk Flags
- Potential for schedule delays
- Quality control concerns
- Contractor performance risk
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, m-a-mortenson-company, texas, delivery-order, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $15.5 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY. CONSTRUCT COMPANY OPERATIONS FACILITY
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 $15.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-09-28. End: 2011-10-31.
What is the track record of M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY with the Department of Defense?
M. A. Mortenson Company is a large, well-established construction firm with a significant history of working on federal contracts, including those with the Department of Defense. While this specific data point does not detail their entire DoD portfolio, their ability to win a contract of this magnitude suggests a proven track record. A comprehensive review would involve examining their past performance ratings, any past disputes or claims, and the overall value and complexity of previous DoD projects they have completed. Their longevity in the industry and the scale of this award imply a generally positive history of performance with government entities.
How does the $15.5 million award compare to similar DoD construction projects?
Comparing the $15.5 million award for the CONSTRUCT COMPANY OPERATIONS FACILITY to similar Department of Defense construction projects requires access to a broader dataset of comparable contracts. Factors such as facility size (square footage), specific functional requirements (e.g., specialized equipment, security features), location, and the prevailing construction market conditions at the time of award significantly influence project costs. Generally, $15.5 million for a large institutional or commercial building project over two years is a substantial investment, consistent with the scale of infrastructure needs for a major military branch like the Army. Without specific benchmarks for similar operational facilities, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents exceptional value or is on the higher end.
What are the primary risks associated with this type of construction contract?
The primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price construction contract include potential construction delays due to unforeseen site conditions, weather, or supply chain disruptions. While the fixed-price nature shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor (M. A. Mortenson Company), significant delays could still impact the government's operational readiness. Quality control is another key risk area; ensuring the facility is built to specification and meets all safety and functional requirements is paramount. Furthermore, the contractor's financial stability and management capacity are critical to successful project completion. The government's risk is primarily related to schedule adherence and final facility quality.
How effective is 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for taxpayer money in large construction projects?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money in large construction projects. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. The requirement for multiple bids (in this case, three) allows the government to select the offer that represents the best overall value, considering price, technical approach, and past performance. While three bidders provide some level of price discovery, a higher number of bids typically intensifies competition further. The effectiveness is also dependent on the clarity of the solicitation documents and the rigor of the evaluation process.
What are the historical spending patterns for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army?
Historical spending patterns for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army reveal a consistent and significant investment in infrastructure. The Army, like other branches of the DoD, regularly procures construction services for barracks, training facilities, operational headquarters, maintenance depots, and specialized research or testing sites. Spending levels fluctuate based on military readiness requirements, modernization efforts, and budget allocations. Projects of this scale (multi-million dollar) are common, particularly for new construction or major renovations. Analyzing past spending would involve looking at the average cost per square foot for similar facility types, the typical contract durations, and the prevalence of different contract types (e.g., firm fixed-price vs. cost-plus) used by the Army over time.
What is the significance of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 in understanding this contract?
The NAICS code 236220, 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction,' is significant because it precisely categorizes the type of work being performed. This code helps classify the contract within the broader construction industry, allowing for comparisons with other similar projects and businesses. It indicates that the project involves the construction of buildings such as office buildings, warehouses, factories, schools, hospitals, or government facilities, as opposed to residential, heavy civil (e.g., roads, bridges), or specialty trade construction. This classification is crucial for statistical analysis, economic research, and understanding the specific market segment the contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company, is operating within for this award.
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: W912HN07R0099
Offers Received: 3
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, 55422
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $15,516,193
Exercised Options: $15,516,193
Current Obligation: $15,516,193
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W912HN08D0021
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-09-28
Current End Date: 2011-10-31
Potential End Date: 2011-10-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2018-10-17
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)