DoD's $18.6M Vandenberg Clinic Modernization Contract Awarded to Structsure Projects Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,644,755 ($18.6M)

Contractor: Structsure Projects Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-09-30

End Date: 2010-06-16

Contract Duration: 990 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CLINIC MODERNIZATION, VANDENBERG, CA

Place of Performance

Location: LOMPOC, SANTA BARBARA County, CALIFORNIA, 93437

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $18.6 million to STRUCTSURE PROJECTS INC for work described as: CLINIC MODERNIZATION, VANDENBERG, CA Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumes the risk for cost overruns. 3. The project duration of 990 days (approximately 2.7 years) suggests a significant construction undertaking. 4. The contract was awarded to Structsure Projects Inc., a company with a track record in construction. 5. The geographic focus on Vandenberg, California, highlights specific infrastructure needs within that region. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags warrants further investigation into subcontracting opportunities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $18.6 million contract is challenging without specific cost breakdowns or comparable project data. However, the firm-fixed-price structure generally aims for cost certainty. The contract's duration of nearly three years suggests a substantial project, and the final cost relative to initial estimates would be a key indicator of value. Without more granular data on the scope of modernization, a definitive value assessment is difficult.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through 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 aggressive pricing and a stronger indication of market-based value.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families at Vandenberg Air Force Base will benefit from modernized clinic facilities. The project delivers essential infrastructure improvements to a key military installation. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, specifically at Vandenberg. The construction work will likely involve a local workforce, providing employment opportunities in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the scope of modernization was underestimated.
Risk associated with the contractor's ability to complete the project within the specified timeline.
Limited competition (two bidders) may have resulted in a less optimal price for taxpayers.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a fair process.
Project addresses critical infrastructure needs for military healthcare.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this sector often supports infrastructure development, facility upgrades, and specialized construction needs for government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal entities for similar facility types and geographic regions.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the procurement was open to all eligible contractors, including large businesses. Further analysis would be needed to determine if the prime contractor has subcontracting plans that include small businesses, which is a common practice to foster participation from smaller entities in larger federal projects.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting office. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, payment schedules tied to milestones, and potential penalties for non-compliance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may not always be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Healthcare Facility Construction
Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
Federal Building Renovations

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope is not well-defined.
Risk of schedule delays impacting facility readiness.
Limited competition may impact final price optimization.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $18.6 million to STRUCTSURE PROJECTS INC. CLINIC MODERNIZATION, VANDENBERG, CA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is STRUCTSURE PROJECTS 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 $18.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-30. End: 2010-06-16.

What is the track record of Structsure Projects Inc. on similar federal contracts?

Assessing the track record of Structsure Projects Inc. requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving clinic modernization or similar institutional building construction. This would involve examining contract histories for on-time completion, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any instances of disputes or contract terminations. Without access to a detailed performance database or past performance reviews specific to this contractor, it is difficult to definitively assess their reliability and expertise for this particular project. However, their selection for an $18.6 million Department of Defense contract suggests they met the necessary qualifications and were deemed capable of executing the work.

How does the awarded amount compare to similar clinic modernization projects?

Directly comparing the $18.6 million award for the Vandenberg clinic modernization to similar projects is challenging without specific details on the scope of work, square footage, and the extent of modernization required. Clinic modernization projects can vary significantly in complexity, from basic upgrades to complete overhauls of systems and facilities. To establish a benchmark, one would need to identify comparable projects in terms of size, type of facility (e.g., primary care, specialized medical), and geographic location. Factors such as prevailing construction costs in California, the specific technological requirements of a modern clinic, and the age and condition of the existing facility all influence project costs. A comprehensive comparison would ideally involve analyzing cost-per-square-foot data from recently completed, similar federal or commercial clinic projects.

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

The primary risk associated with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, like this one, is that the contractor, Structsure Projects Inc., bears the financial responsibility for any cost overruns. If the actual costs of labor, materials, or unforeseen construction challenges exceed the agreed-upon price, the contractor's profit margin will be reduced, or they could incur a loss. Conversely, the government benefits from cost certainty. However, risks for the government can include the contractor potentially cutting corners on quality to maintain profitability if unexpected cost increases arise, or the contractor becoming financially distressed if costs escalate significantly. Effective oversight and clear contract specifications are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How effective is the competition level in ensuring value for taxpayers?

The competition level for this contract, with two bidders under a full and open solicitation, provides a moderate level of assurance for taxpayer value. While two bidders indicate that the opportunity was accessible and attracted interest, a higher number of bids typically intensifies price competition, leading to potentially lower offers. The effectiveness hinges on whether these two bidders were highly qualified and submitted competitive proposals. If the bidders were closely matched in capability and price, the outcome is likely favorable. However, if one bidder was significantly more capable or had a cost advantage, the competition might not have driven the price down as much as it could have with more participants. Further analysis of the bid proposals and the final pricing structure would be needed for a definitive assessment.

What is the historical spending pattern for clinic modernization at Vandenberg Air Force Base?

To understand the historical spending pattern for clinic modernization at Vandenberg Air Force Base, one would need to access historical contract data for this specific installation and facility type. This would involve searching federal procurement databases for previous contracts related to healthcare facility upgrades, renovations, or new construction at Vandenberg. Analyzing this data would reveal the frequency of such projects, the typical contract values, the types of contractors involved, and the procurement methods used. Understanding past spending can help contextualize the current $18.6 million award, indicating whether it represents a typical investment, a significant increase, or a departure from historical trends. Without this historical context, it's difficult to assess if this contract aligns with established spending patterns or represents a new investment strategy.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W9126G04R0002

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Address: 8041 WEST 47TH STREET, SUI, OVERLAND PARK, KS, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,644,755

Exercised Options: $18,644,755

Current Obligation: $18,644,755

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9126G04D0011

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline