DoD awards $20.4M for Fort Carson hospital construction, completed on time and within budget

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,404,049 ($20.4M)

Contractor: Federal Contracting Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-11-10

End Date: 2012-06-04

Contract Duration: 1,302 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: MIL - ADAL EVANS ARMY COMM HOSP, FCN, FORT CARSON, CO

Place of Performance

Location: COLORADO SPRINGS, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80913

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.4 million to FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC for work described as: MIL - ADAL EVANS ARMY COMM HOSP, FCN, FORT CARSON, CO Key points: 1. Contract achieved strong value for money, completing a significant construction project within its awarded value. 2. Full and open competition likely contributed to competitive pricing. 3. Project completion within the estimated duration suggests effective project management and minimal delays. 4. The contract was awarded to a single vendor, indicating a focused execution. 5. This project falls within the broader category of military infrastructure development and maintenance.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $20.4 million for the construction of the Evans Army Community Hospital at Fort Carson appears reasonable given the scope of a major healthcare facility. Benchmarking against similar large-scale hospital construction projects would provide a more precise value assessment, but the absence of significant cost overruns suggests effective cost control during execution. The firm-fixed-price contract type also implies that the contractor bore the risk of cost increases, which is generally favorable for the government.

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 offers. While the number of bidders is not explicitly stated, this procurement method typically fosters a competitive environment, leading to potentially better pricing and quality for the government. The fact that it was competed fully suggests a healthy market for this type of construction service.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces and ensuring the government receives the best value available.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families at Fort Carson will benefit from the improved healthcare facilities. The project delivered a new hospital building, enhancing medical service capacity. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Carson, Colorado. Construction activities likely supported local jobs and the regional economy during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Positive Signals

Project completed within the awarded dollar amount.
Contract duration was met, indicating efficient project management.
Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically for a large-scale healthcare facility. The market for military construction is significant, with substantial government spending allocated annually to build and maintain infrastructure. This project represents a typical investment in military readiness and personnel support, aligning with broader trends in defense spending on facilities.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions. Therefore, the direct impact on small businesses through this specific award is likely minimal unless they participated as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine subcontracting opportunities and their utilization.

Oversight & Accountability

As a Department of the Army contract, oversight would typically involve contracting officers, program managers, and potentially the Army Audit Agency or Inspector General's office. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract and its completion within scope and budget suggest effective oversight during its execution. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Healthcare Facility Construction
Department of Defense Contracts
Army Healthcare Facilities

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.4 million to FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC. MIL - ADAL EVANS ARMY COMM HOSP, FCN, FORT CARSON, CO

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-11-10. End: 2012-06-04.

What was the specific scope of work for the MIL - ADAL EVANS ARMY COMM HOSP contract?

The contract, awarded to FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC, was for the construction of the Evans Army Community Hospital at Fort Carson, Colorado. This involved building a new healthcare facility to serve military personnel and their families. The scope likely included all aspects of construction, from site preparation and foundation work to the erection of the building structure, installation of utilities, interior finishing, and potentially landscaping and associated site improvements. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract indicates that the contractor was responsible for delivering the completed hospital within the agreed-upon price, covering all labor, materials, and overhead.

How does the $20.4 million award compare to other similar military hospital construction projects?

Directly comparing the $20.4 million award to other military hospital construction projects requires access to a comprehensive database of similar projects with detailed scope and location information. However, for a facility of this nature, $20.4 million appears to be on the lower end or mid-range, especially considering the complexity of hospital construction which includes specialized medical equipment infrastructure, advanced HVAC systems, and stringent building codes. Larger, more complex hospitals or those in high-cost areas could easily exceed this figure. The fact that this project was completed within budget suggests efficient management or perhaps a less complex design than some other military medical facilities.

What were the primary risks associated with this construction contract, and how were they managed?

Key risks for a large construction project like a hospital include cost overruns due to material price fluctuations or unforeseen site conditions, schedule delays caused by weather, labor shortages, or design changes, and quality control issues to ensure compliance with medical facility standards. The firm-fixed-price contract structure inherently transferred the primary cost overrun risk to the contractor. Effective project management, detailed planning, robust quality assurance processes, and potentially contingency planning for weather or site issues would have been crucial for managing schedule and quality risks. The successful completion within the original timeframe and budget suggests these risks were well-managed.

What is the historical spending pattern for hospital construction at Fort Carson or within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending on hospital construction within the Department of the Army, and specifically at installations like Fort Carson, tends to be cyclical and driven by modernization needs, capacity expansion, or replacement of aging infrastructure. Major hospital projects are significant investments, often planned years in advance and funded through specific military construction appropriations. While this $20.4 million contract represents a substantial single investment, the Army undertakes numerous construction projects annually across various categories. Analyzing broader spending trends would require examining multi-year budget data and project portfolios to identify patterns in the scale and frequency of healthcare facility investments.

What was the track record of FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC prior to or during this contract?

Information regarding FEDERAL CONTRACTING INC's specific track record prior to or during this contract is not detailed in the provided data. A thorough assessment would involve reviewing their past performance ratings on federal contracts, any history of litigation or disputes, their financial stability, and their experience with similar large-scale construction projects. Government contract databases often contain past performance information that could shed light on their reliability and capabilities. Without this additional data, it's difficult to definitively assess their track record beyond the successful completion of this specific project.

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: W9128F06R0015

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7025 CAMPUS DRIVE, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, 05

Business Categories: Category Business, Emerging Small Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,404,049

Exercised Options: $20,404,049

Current Obligation: $20,404,049

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9128F06D0019

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline