Navy awards $11.7M construction contract to Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. for Preble Hall

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,658,543 ($11.7M)

Contractor: Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-10-24

End Date: 2009-02-18

Contract Duration: 483 days

Daily Burn Rate: $24.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 17

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: PREBLE HALL

Place of Performance

Location: ANNAPOLIS, ANNE ARUNDEL County, MARYLAND, 21402

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.7 million to COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: PREBLE HALL Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. 3. The duration of the contract was 483 days, suggesting a moderately complex project. 4. The contract was awarded to a single vendor, Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. 5. The project is located in Maryland, a key state for defense contracting.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparable project data. However, the award amount of $11.7 million for commercial and institutional building construction appears within a reasonable range for a project of this nature and duration. Further analysis would require comparing the per-square-foot cost or specific unit costs against similar Navy construction projects in the Maryland region.

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 24 bids were received, suggesting a healthy level of competition for this construction project. A higher number of bids generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The robust 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 primary beneficiary of this contract is the Department of the Navy, which receives the renovated Preble Hall facility. The services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction, likely involving renovation or new construction of facilities. The geographic impact is localized to Maryland, where the project is situated. The contract supports the construction workforce in Maryland, providing employment opportunities for skilled tradespeople and laborers.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract did not adequately account for all project contingencies.
Risk of delays in project completion impacting the Navy's operational readiness.
Quality control concerns inherent in any large-scale construction project.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
Fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Multiple bids received (24) suggest a competitive market for this type of construction.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The Department of Defense, and the Navy in particular, are significant clients for construction services, undertaking numerous projects for infrastructure, housing, and operational facilities. Market size for federal construction is substantial, with billions spent annually. This contract represents a specific investment in facility modernization or expansion within the Navy's portfolio.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed for a definitive assessment.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Navy contracting command. Quality assurance representatives would likely be assigned to monitor construction progress and adherence to specifications. 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

Department of Defense Facilities Construction
Navy Base Infrastructure Projects
Commercial Building Renovation Contracts
Fixed-Price Construction Awards

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if fixed price is insufficient.
Risk of project delays impacting Navy operations.
Quality control concerns inherent in construction projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.7 million to COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, INC.. PREBLE HALL

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is COAKLEY & WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-10-24. End: 2009-02-18.

What is the track record of Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. with federal contracts?

Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily with the Department of Defense and other civilian agencies. Analyzing their past performance, including contract values, types, and any reported issues or awards, would provide insight into their reliability and capability. A review of their contract history might reveal patterns in project types, geographic distribution, and success rates. For instance, understanding if they have successfully completed similar-sized construction projects on time and within budget for the government is crucial. Additionally, examining any past performance evaluations or disputes could highlight potential risks or strengths associated with this contractor.

How does the awarded amount compare to similar construction projects by the Navy?

Comparing the $11.7 million award for Preble Hall to similar Navy construction projects requires access to a broader dataset of comparable contracts. Key metrics for comparison would include the type of construction (e.g., renovation, new build), facility size (square footage), location, and project complexity. Without specific benchmarks, it's difficult to definitively state if this award represents excellent or fair value. However, if similar projects in the same region with comparable scope were awarded at significantly lower amounts, it might indicate a less favorable price. Conversely, if the scope was more extensive or the market conditions were more challenging, the price could be justified. A detailed cost-benefit analysis considering the specific requirements and market conditions at the time of award is necessary for a precise valuation.

What are the primary risks associated with this fixed-price construction contract?

The primary risks associated with this fixed-price construction contract primarily lie with the contractor, Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. If the project's costs exceed the fixed price due to unforeseen circumstances, material price increases, or labor shortages, the contractor will absorb the loss. For the government, risks include potential quality compromises if the contractor seeks to cut costs to maintain profitability, or project delays if the contractor faces financial or operational difficulties. There's also the risk that the initial fixed price, determined during a competitive bidding process, might not perfectly align with the final scope if significant change orders become necessary, although change orders are typically managed through specific contract modification procedures.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for taxpayer money in construction contracts?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayer money in construction contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, the government maximizes the pool of potential contractors, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing. The presence of numerous bidders often drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. Furthermore, a competitive environment encourages contractors to submit realistic and efficient bids, as they must account for all costs to remain profitable. While it requires more administrative effort to manage the solicitation and evaluation process, the potential savings and improved quality resulting from robust competition typically outweigh these costs, leading to better overall value for taxpayers.

What is the historical spending trend for commercial and institutional building construction by the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending trends for commercial and institutional building construction by the Department of the Navy are substantial, reflecting the vast infrastructure needs of a global naval force. Annually, the Navy awards billions of dollars in contracts for new construction, renovation, and maintenance of various facilities, including barracks, administrative buildings, training centers, and maintenance depots. Spending can fluctuate based on military readiness requirements, budget allocations, and infrastructure modernization initiatives. Periods of increased geopolitical tension or significant base realignment and closure (BRAC) actions often correlate with higher spending in this category. Analyzing multi-year spending data would reveal specific patterns and priorities within the Navy's construction program.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N6247704R0012

Offers Received: 17

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 16 S SUMMIT AVE STE 300, GAITHERSBURG, MD, 20877

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,658,543

Exercised Options: $11,658,543

Current Obligation: $11,658,543

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247704D0034

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline