Tutor Perini Corporation awarded $28.7M contract for large administrative facility construction by the Department of the Army
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $28,712,980 ($28.7M)
Contractor: Tutor Perini Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2008-08-14
End Date: 2009-11-13
Contract Duration: 456 days
Daily Burn Rate: $63.0K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 60
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: LARGE ADMIN FACILITY
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $28.7 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION for work described as: LARGE ADMIN FACILITY Key points: 1. Contract awarded at a competitive price point, suggesting good value for the government. 2. Full and open competition indicates a robust bidding process. 3. Contract duration of 456 days aligns with typical construction project timelines. 4. Fixed-price contract structure transfers risk to the contractor. 5. Project falls within the broad commercial and institutional building construction sector.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $28.7 million for a large administrative facility appears reasonable given the scope of work. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects managed by the Department of the Army suggests that this award falls within expected cost ranges. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract also implies that the contractor has assumed the primary cost risk, 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 bids. This process typically involves a significant number of bidders, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. The presence of multiple bids suggests that the government received a range of proposals, allowing for selection of the best value.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is the most advantageous for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through robust price discovery and a wide selection of qualified contractors.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its personnel who will utilize the new administrative facility. The contract delivers a large administrative facility, crucial for operational support and personnel management. The geographic impact is localized to the site of the facility construction, likely within a military installation. The project will likely involve a significant number of construction workers, providing employment opportunities in the skilled trades.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for construction delays impacting facility readiness.
- Risk of cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite fixed-price contract.
- Ensuring compliance with all environmental and safety regulations during construction.
Positive Signals
- Fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
- Full and open competition suggests a competitive pricing environment.
- Contract awarded to a known entity, Tutor Perini Corporation, which may have a track record on similar projects.
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, government buildings, and educational facilities. Spending in this area is often driven by government needs for infrastructure and operational facilities, as well as private sector demand for commercial spaces. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be assessed against other large federal building projects.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While Tutor Perini Corporation is a large prime contractor, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors. The extent of small business subcontracting would depend on the prime contractor's strategy and the specific requirements of the project, but it is not explicitly mandated by the contract terms provided.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this construction contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) and the relevant Army Corps of Engineers district. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract, which penalizes the contractor for cost overruns. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific project-level oversight details are not provided.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction
- Federal Building Construction
- Department of Defense Facilities Management
- Army Corps of Engineers Projects
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise.
- Risk of construction delays impacting operational readiness.
- Ensuring compliance with stringent federal building codes and environmental regulations.
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, firm-fixed-price, large-contract, full-and-open-competition, administrative-facility, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, tutor-perini-corporation, defense-spending
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $28.7 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION. LARGE ADMIN FACILITY
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $28.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-08-14. End: 2009-11-13.
What is Tutor Perini Corporation's track record with the Department of Defense on similar large-scale construction projects?
Tutor Perini Corporation has a significant history of working with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies on large-scale construction projects. While specific details for this particular administrative facility contract are limited in the provided data, the company is known for undertaking complex projects, including military facilities, hospitals, and infrastructure. A deeper dive into their past performance, including any past performance evaluations or disputes on similar DoD contracts, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and capability for this project. Reviewing their portfolio of completed federal projects would offer insights into their experience with government regulations, security requirements, and project management standards pertinent to military construction.
How does the awarded price of $28.7 million compare to the estimated cost or budget for this administrative facility?
The provided data does not include the estimated cost or budget for the administrative facility, making a direct comparison to the awarded price of $28.7 million impossible. However, the fact that the contract was awarded under full and open competition suggests that the awarded price is likely competitive and reflects market rates. To assess value, one would typically compare the awarded price against independent government cost estimates, historical data for similar facilities, and the number of bids received. A significant number of bids, coupled with an award price that aligns with or is below estimates, would indicate good value for taxpayers. Without the estimated cost, a definitive statement on value relative to budget cannot be made.
What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for a large construction project like this?
The primary risk associated with a firm fixed-price (FFP) contract for a large construction project is the potential for the contractor to incur significant losses if costs exceed their estimates. While FFP transfers cost risk to the contractor, it can incentivize them to cut corners on quality or safety if they are under financial pressure. For the government, the risk is that the contractor may not have the financial stability to complete the project, or that disputes may arise over scope changes or unforeseen conditions, potentially leading to delays and litigation. Effective oversight and clear contract terms are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure project success.
What is the expected impact of this administrative facility on the Department of the Army's operational capacity?
The construction of a large administrative facility is expected to enhance the Department of the Army's operational capacity by providing modern, efficient, and potentially consolidated space for administrative functions. This can lead to improved workflow, better collaboration among personnel, and enhanced security for sensitive information and operations. The facility could support a larger workforce, facilitate new programs, or replace outdated infrastructure, thereby increasing overall efficiency and effectiveness. The specific impact would depend on the intended use and the capabilities the new facility is designed to provide, such as housing specific command elements or support services.
How does the contract duration of 456 days compare to typical timelines for similar federal construction projects?
A contract duration of 456 days, approximately 15 months, is generally within the typical range for the construction of a large administrative facility for the federal government. The complexity of the facility, site conditions, specific design requirements, and the agency's urgency can all influence project timelines. Large federal construction projects often face rigorous planning, permitting, and execution phases. While 456 days is a substantial period, it is not unusually long, suggesting a realistic timeframe was set for the project's completion, assuming no major unforeseen delays.
What are the potential implications of the 'AW: DO' designation on this contract?
The 'AW: DO' designation likely refers to 'Awarded to Defense Organization' or a similar internal code indicating the award was made by or for a defense entity. In this context, it signifies that the contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a component of the Department of Defense. This designation reinforces the nature of the project as a government contract supporting military or defense-related operations. It may also imply adherence to specific defense procurement regulations and standards throughout the contract lifecycle, from bidding to execution and final delivery.
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: W912ER04R0004
Offers Received: 60
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Contractor Details
Address: 73 MT WAYTE AVENUE, FRAMINGHAM, MA, 05
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $28,712,980
Exercised Options: $28,712,980
Current Obligation: $28,712,980
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W912ER04D0008
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-08-14
Current End Date: 2009-11-13
Potential End Date: 2009-11-13 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2011-11-20
More Contracts from Tutor Perini Corporation
- 200312!001242!2100!CA78 !transatlantic Program Center !daca7803d0006 !A!N! !N!0002 !20030919!20040331!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 MT Wayte Avenue !framingham !MA!01701!* !* !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000000460000!n!n!000000000000!y199!other Miscellaneous Buildings !C2 !construction !1000!NOT Discernable or Classified !236220!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20040331!B! ! !n!a!d!n!u!1!001!n!2a!z!n!z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! !Y!Y! ! !0001! ! — $379.4M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Embassy Housing — $157.2M (Department of Defense)
- 200512!501265!2100!w912er!transatlantic Program Center !w912er04d0008 !A!N! !N!0003 ! !20050928!20061231!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 Mount Wayte AVE !framingham !MA!01701!00000! !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000119283840!n!n!000000000000!y159!other Industrial Buildings !C2 !construction !000 !* !236220!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!u!j!2!001!b! !Z!N!A! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $127.2M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Hurricane Rebuild Task Order for SAN Juan Phase II East Base BID and Option 5: SE X Waterfront Boat Ramp — $117.0M (Department of Homeland Security)
- Ffp/Satoc Saudi Arabia (FMS) F-15 Modernizaiton Program, Khurais Electronic Warfare Range., Psab 13-0004 — $106.4M (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)