Department of Defense contract for commercial building construction awarded to Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC for over $24.7 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,755,918 ($24.8M)

Contractor: Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-09-29

End Date: 2010-05-29

Contract Duration: 607 days

Daily Burn Rate: $40.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: FIRES BRIGADE, FT. BLISS

Place of Performance

Location: EL PASO, EL PASO County, TEXAS, 79906

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.8 million to ALUTIIQ INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: FIRES BRIGADE, FT. BLISS Key points: 1. The contract value of $24.7 million for building construction appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this nature, though specific benchmarks are needed for definitive value-for-money assessment. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, this contract suggests a competitive bidding process that should have driven price discovery. 3. The fixed-firm price contract type indicates that the contractor assumes most of the cost risk, which is a positive indicator for the government. 4. The contract duration of approximately 607 days (20 months) suggests a substantial project scope. 5. The project's location in Texas is noted, with potential implications for local economic impact and workforce. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this was not specifically targeted for small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $24.7 million for commercial and institutional building construction requires benchmarking against similar projects to definitively assess value for money. Without specific details on the scope of work, square footage, or complexity of the facilities constructed, it is difficult to compare pricing accurately. However, the firm-fixed-price structure generally favors the government by shifting cost overrun risks to the contractor. Further analysis would involve comparing the per-square-foot cost or cost per unit of construction against industry averages for similar government facilities.

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 two bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of bids typically leads to more robust price discovery and potentially lower prices for the government. The specific details of the bidding process, such as the number of proposals received and the evaluation criteria, would provide further insight into the effectiveness of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages a wider range of contractors to bid, potentially leading to more competitive pricing and better value. The presence of two bidders suggests that while competition existed, there may have been opportunities for even greater savings with more participants.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of Defense and its personnel at Fort Bliss, Texas, who will utilize the constructed facilities. The contract delivers commercial and institutional building construction services, likely encompassing the development of new structures or renovation of existing ones to support military operations. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Bliss, Texas, potentially creating temporary employment opportunities for local construction workers and supporting local businesses through the supply chain. The project implies a need for skilled construction labor, contributing to the local economy in the El Paso region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the scope was not fully defined, despite the firm-fixed-price structure.
The limited number of bidders (2) might indicate barriers to entry or a lack of broader market interest, potentially impacting long-term competition.
Ensuring the constructed facilities meet long-term operational needs and sustainability standards requires ongoing assessment.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type effectively transfers cost risk to the contractor.
Awarded through full and open competition, maximizing the pool of potential bidders.
The contract duration of over 600 days suggests a significant and potentially impactful construction project.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building of non-residential structures such as offices, educational facilities, healthcare buildings, and government installations. Federal spending in this area is crucial for maintaining and expanding government infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per square foot for similar military construction projects or government facilities built around the same period.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the 'sb' (small business) indicator is false. This suggests that the primary competition was not focused on reserving the contract for small businesses. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within the provided data. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC, as the prime contractor, actively seeks to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Army at Fort Bliss. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified construction within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of contract awards, though detailed project performance data may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Department of Defense Facilities Management
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Buildings Service

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation if not managed tightly.
Risk of quality compromise under fixed-price if oversight is weak.
Limited competition may reduce price optimization.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.8 million to ALUTIIQ INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC. FIRES BRIGADE, FT. BLISS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALUTIIQ INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-09-29. End: 2010-05-29.

What was the specific scope of work for this "Commercial and Institutional Building Construction" contract at Fort Bliss?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' (NAICS code 236220) awarded to Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC. While the specific scope of work is not detailed in the summary data, this NAICS code typically covers the construction of commercial and institutional buildings such as office buildings, shopping malls, hotels, and other commercial establishments, as well as public buildings like courthouses, government buildings, and schools. For a military installation like Fort Bliss, this could involve constructing barracks, administrative buildings, training facilities, or support structures. The contract duration of 607 days and the value of over $24.7 million suggest a substantial project, likely involving new construction or significant renovation rather than minor repairs.

How does the awarded amount of $24.7 million compare to similar construction contracts for military bases?

Comparing the $24.7 million award requires context regarding the specific type and scale of construction. For instance, constructing a new barracks complex or a large administrative facility at a military base can easily reach tens of millions of dollars. If this contract was for a single, moderately sized building or a significant renovation, the price might be considered average. However, if it was for a smaller structure or a less complex project, it could be on the higher side. Benchmarking against projects with similar square footage, complexity (e.g., specialized facilities, seismic requirements), and location would be necessary for a precise comparison. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests the government aimed to cap its expenditure at this amount.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract of this magnitude and duration?

While firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally favored for shifting cost risk to the contractor, risks can still exist, especially for long-duration projects like this 607-day contract. The primary risk for the government is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or materials to maintain profitability if unforeseen issues arise, despite the FFP structure. For the contractor, risks include underestimating costs, encountering unexpected site conditions, or material price escalations, which could lead to financial losses if not adequately planned for. The government's risk is also tied to the contractor's financial stability and ability to complete the project successfully. Robust oversight and clear performance standards are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the competition level (2 bidders) imply for the government and taxpayers?

Having two bidders for this contract suggests a moderate level of competition. While it indicates that the opportunity was not a sole-source award and that at least two companies were interested and capable of performing the work, it might not represent the most competitive scenario. Ideally, a higher number of bidders (e.g., 3-5 or more) often leads to more aggressive pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions. With only two bidders, there's a possibility that the government did not achieve the lowest possible price, and taxpayers may have paid slightly more than they would have in a more crowded field. However, the 'Full and Open Competition' designation means the process was designed to attract as many bidders as possible.

What is the track record of Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC in federal contracting, particularly in construction?

Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC has a history of receiving federal contracts, primarily within the Department of Defense and other agencies. Their contract portfolio often includes services related to base operations, logistics, construction, and facilities maintenance. Information available through federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) would detail their past performance, including the types of contracts awarded, their values, and agencies served. A review of their past projects would indicate their experience and success rate in delivering construction services of similar scale and complexity, providing insight into their reliability and capability for this specific contract.

How has federal spending on commercial and institutional building construction evolved over the years, and where does this contract fit?

Federal spending on commercial and institutional building construction fluctuates based on defense needs, infrastructure initiatives, and agency requirements. Historically, significant investments are made during periods of military expansion or modernization, or in response to national infrastructure programs. This $24.7 million contract awarded in 2008 represents a specific investment in facilities at Fort Bliss. To understand its place in the broader trend, one would need to analyze annual federal outlays for NAICS code 236220 or similar construction codes, looking at total spending, average contract values, and the distribution of awards across different agencies and geographic locations over time. This contract would be one data point within that larger spending pattern.

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: W912PP07R0017

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Afognak Native Corp (UEI: 052089695)

Address: 3033 S PARKER RD STE 1111, AURORA, CO, 06

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,755,918

Exercised Options: $24,755,918

Current Obligation: $24,755,918

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912PP07D0021

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline