Department of Defense awards $290M contract for new single-family housing construction at Keesler AFB
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $290,422,057 ($290.4M)
Contractor: Hunt Building Company, Ltd
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2006-09-22
End Date: 2010-07-29
Contract Duration: 1,406 days
Daily Burn Rate: $206.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 10
Pricing Type: COST NO FEE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: 200612!002154!5700!FA8903!HSW/PKV !FA890304D8700 !A!N! !N!0004 ! !20060922!20111211!008001349!129611351!136115255!N!HUNT BUILDING COMPANY , LTD !4401 N MESA ST STE 201 !EL PASO !TX!79902!37200!047!28!KEESLER AFB !HARRISON !MISS !+000004260700!N!N!000000000000!Y169!OTHER RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236115!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20081211!B! ! !A! !A!N!S!2!010!B! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! !Y! ! !0001! !
Place of Performance
Location: BILOXI, HARRISON County, MISSISSIPPI, 39530
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $290.4 million to HUNT BUILDING COMPANY, LTD for work described as: 200612!002154!5700!FA8903!HSW/PKV !FA890304D8700 !A!N! !N!0004 ! !20060922!20111211!008001349!129611351!136115255!N!HUNT BUILDING COMPANY , LTD !4401 N MESA ST STE 201 !EL PASO !TX!79902!37200!047!28!KEESLER AFB !HARR… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for construction services, indicating a need for infrastructure development. 2. The contract duration of 1406 days suggests a significant, multi-year project. 3. Awarded to Hunt Building Company, Ltd., a contractor with prior federal experience. 4. The contract type is 'Cost No Fee', which requires careful monitoring of costs. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236115 points to new single-family housing construction. 6. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The total award amount of $290,422,057 for new single-family housing construction appears substantial. Benchmarking this against similar projects would be necessary to assess value for money. The 'Cost No Fee' contract type means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs plus a fixed fee, which can sometimes lead to higher overall costs if not managed tightly. Without specific per-unit cost data or comparisons to market rates for similar housing units in Mississippi, a definitive value assessment is challenging.
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 a bid. The data shows 10 bids were received. This level of competition is generally positive for price discovery and can lead to more favorable pricing for the government. The presence of multiple bidders suggests a healthy market for this type of construction service.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for a large construction project like this is beneficial for taxpayers, as it helps ensure the government secures the best possible price and quality for the services rendered.
Public Impact
Military families stationed at Keesler Air Force Base will benefit from new housing. The project delivers new single-family housing units, improving living conditions for service members. The geographic impact is localized to Keesler Air Force Base in Mississippi. The construction project will likely create jobs in the construction sector in the local area.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The 'Cost No Fee' contract type requires diligent oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable and within budget.
- The large dollar amount of the contract necessitates robust financial controls and performance monitoring.
- Potential for cost overruns exists in large construction projects, especially with 'Cost No Fee' arrangements.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive market and potentially good value.
- The contractor, Hunt Building Company, Ltd., has experience with federal contracts.
- The project addresses a clear need for improved housing at a military installation.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically focusing on new single-family housing. The construction industry is a significant part of the U.S. economy, with federal contracts often playing a role in infrastructure development and military base improvements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other military housing construction projects or large-scale residential developments awarded by government entities.
Small Business Impact
The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. It was awarded under full and open competition. Therefore, the direct impact on small businesses through set-asides is not apparent. However, the prime contractor, Hunt Building Company, Ltd., may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which would be a positive implication for the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Air Force contracting office at Keesler AFB. Accountability measures would include performance reviews, site inspections, and financial audits, especially given the 'Cost No Fee' contract type. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction (MILCON)
- Family Housing Construction
- Department of Defense Housing Programs
- Air Force Civil Engineer Center Contracts
Risk Flags
- Cost-Plus-Fee Contract Type
- Large Contract Value
- Construction Project Risks
- Potential for Cost Overruns
- Schedule Delay Risk
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-air-force, keesler-afb, mississippi, new-housing, single-family-housing, cost-plus-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, military-construction
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $290.4 million to HUNT BUILDING COMPANY, LTD. 200612!002154!5700!FA8903!HSW/PKV !FA890304D8700 !A!N! !N!0004 ! !20060922!20111211!008001349!129611351!136115255!N!HUNT BUILDING COMPANY , LTD !4401 N MESA ST STE 201 !EL PASO !TX!79902!37200!047!28!KEESLER AFB !HARRISON !MISS !+000004260700!N!N!000000000000!Y169!OTHER RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236115!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!200
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is HUNT BUILDING COMPANY, LTD.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $290.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2006-09-22. End: 2010-07-29.
What is the track record of Hunt Building Company, Ltd. with federal construction contracts?
Hunt Building Company, Ltd. has a history of securing federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense. While this specific award is for a substantial amount, their experience likely includes various construction projects for military installations. A deeper dive into their past performance ratings, any past disputes or contract terminations, and the types of projects they have completed would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and capability. Reviewing their award history across different agencies and contract types would also offer insights into their breadth of experience and success rates in the federal contracting arena.
How does the 'Cost No Fee' contract type compare to other pricing arrangements for similar construction projects?
The 'Cost No Fee' (Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee or CPFF) contract type is common for large, complex projects where the scope may evolve or is not fully defined at the outset. In this arrangement, the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs incurred and pays a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This differs from fixed-price contracts, where the price is set upfront, and from cost-reimbursement contracts without a fee. While CPFF offers flexibility, it carries a higher risk of cost growth if not managed diligently, as the contractor is incentivized to incur costs to complete the project, and the fee is fixed regardless of the final cost. For taxpayers, this necessitates robust oversight to ensure costs are reasonable and allocable to the contract.
What are the potential risks associated with a $290 million housing construction project?
A project of this magnitude carries several inherent risks. These include potential cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions, material price fluctuations, labor shortages, or scope creep. Schedule delays are also a significant risk, which can impact military readiness and family well-being. Performance risks involve the quality of construction and adherence to specifications. Furthermore, the 'Cost No Fee' structure requires vigilant oversight to prevent unnecessary expenditures. Contract disputes, environmental compliance issues, and contractor performance failures are other potential risks that could impact the project's success and cost.
What is the historical spending pattern for new single-family housing construction at Keesler AFB or similar installations?
Analyzing historical spending for similar projects at Keesler AFB or comparable Air Force installations would provide valuable context. This would involve examining past contracts for housing construction, their award amounts, durations, and contract types. Understanding the average cost per housing unit over time, adjusted for inflation, can help determine if the current $290 million award represents a reasonable investment. Significant deviations from historical spending patterns, without clear justification (e.g., increased scope, higher material costs), could signal a need for closer scrutiny of the current contract's pricing and value.
How does the number of bids received (10) influence the perceived value for money in this contract?
Receiving 10 bids for a contract of this size and nature is generally a positive indicator for value for money. A higher number of bids suggests robust competition, which typically drives down prices and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms and quality. It implies that the market has sufficient capacity and interest in undertaking this type of project for the government. This competitive environment makes it more likely that the government secured a fair price and that the chosen contractor is well-qualified and motivated to perform efficiently to secure future work. Conversely, a low number of bids might suggest market limitations or potential issues with the solicitation that deterred participation.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Residential Building Construction › New Single-Family Housing Construction (except For-Sale Builders)
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: 10
Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Hunt Companies, Inc.
Address: 4401 N MESA ST STE 201, EL PASO, TX, 79902
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: FA890304D8700
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2006-09-22
Current End Date: 2010-07-29
Potential End Date: 2010-07-29 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-06-02
More Contracts from Hunt Building Company, Ltd
- Federal Contract — $86.4M (Department of Defense)
- 200306!162301!1700!C2470 !naval Facilities Engineering Com!n6247002c2052 !A!N! !N! !20030325!20060418!008001349!129611351!136115255!n!hunt Building Company, Ltd !4401 N Mesa !EL Paso !tx!79902!09900!133!37!camp Lejeune !onslow !N Carolina!+000038082000!n!n!000000000000!y161!family Housing Facilities !C2 !construction !2000!NOT Discernable or Classified !236117!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !a!u!j!2!005!b! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !c!c!a!a!000!a!c!y! !N! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $82.0M (Department of Defense)
- FY06 Replace & Improve Housing, Edwards AFB, CA Including Demolition of Obsolete Units and Construction of NEW Units — $58.2M (Department of Defense)
- Replace Military Family Housing AT Mountain Home AFB — $54.1M (Department of Defense)
- 200509!001324!5700!fa8903!hsw/Pkv !FA890304D8700 !A!N! !N!0001 ! !20050610!20070530!008001349!129611351!136115255!n!hunt Building Company, Ltd !4401 N Mesa ST STE 201 !EL Paso !tx!79902!21600!029!06!edwards AFB !kern !california!+000039993500!n!n!000000000000!y169!other Residential Buildings !C2 !construction !000 !* !236115!a!a!5!b!s! ! !D!20081211!B! ! !A! !a!n!j!2!010!b! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !z!z!a!a!000!a!c!y! !N! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $42.0M (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)