Interior Department awards $38.5M contract for Hopi Detention Center design-build services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $38,467,874 ($38.5M)

Contractor: Tepa EC, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2021-10-04

End Date: 2025-10-31

Contract Duration: 1,488 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: HOPI DETENTION CENTER DESIGN BUILD

Place of Performance

Location: TUBA CITY, COCONINO County, ARIZONA, 86045

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $38.5 million to TEPA EC, LLC for work described as: HOPI DETENTION CENTER DESIGN BUILD Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in infrastructure for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but requires careful monitoring of scope changes. 3. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate procurement strategy. 4. The project duration of nearly 1500 days indicates a complex, long-term undertaking. 5. Performance risk is mitigated by the fixed-price nature, but execution challenges remain. 6. This contract aligns with federal efforts to improve facilities and services for Native American communities.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $38.5 million for a design-build project of this scale appears reasonable, especially considering the specialized nature of detention facility construction. Benchmarking against similar federal projects for correctional or detention facilities would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests an expectation of cost certainty, but the final cost will depend on the contractor's efficiency and management of unforeseen issues.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on pre-qualification or other criteria. The presence of 5 bids suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this project, which generally benefits price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging the most capable contractors to offer their best terms.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education, which will gain a new detention facility. The contract delivers design and construction services for a detention center, addressing a critical infrastructure need. The project is geographically located in Arizona, impacting the local economy and workforce in that region. Construction activities will likely create temporary employment opportunities for skilled trades and laborers in Arizona.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope creep is not managed effectively under the fixed-price contract.
Ensuring the design meets all operational and security requirements for a detention facility is critical.
Coordination between design and construction phases can be complex and may present integration challenges.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty and incentivizes contractor efficiency.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process, likely yielding a qualified contractor.
The project addresses a clear need for improved infrastructure, indicating strong program alignment.

Sector Analysis

The Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector is a significant part of the U.S. economy. This contract falls within the specialized niche of designing and building correctional or detention facilities, which requires specific expertise in security, compliance, and operational efficiency. Federal spending in this area is often driven by the need to modernize or replace aging infrastructure and to meet evolving regulatory requirements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not specify any small business set-aside. Therefore, direct benefits to small businesses through a set-aside are not apparent. However, the prime contractor, TEPA EC, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors for various construction trades or specialized services, contributing indirectly to the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and program officials within the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability for the contractor to deliver the project within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency will be facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms and potentially through public project updates, though specific IG jurisdiction details would require further investigation.

Related Government Programs

Bureau of Indian Affairs Facility Construction
Federal Detention Center Construction
Design-Build Contracts
Correctional Facility Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep impacting final cost.
Complexity of integrating design and build phases.
Ensuring adherence to stringent detention facility security and operational standards.
Managing long-term operational and maintenance costs associated with specialized facility design.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $38.5 million to TEPA EC, LLC. HOPI DETENTION CENTER DESIGN BUILD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TEPA EC, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $38.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-10-04. End: 2025-10-31.

What is the track record of TEPA EC, LLC in completing similar federal design-build projects, particularly for correctional or detention facilities?

A review of federal contract databases and past performance information would be necessary to fully assess TEPA EC, LLC's track record. Information such as past performance evaluations, any history of contract disputes or terminations, and the successful completion of projects with similar scope, complexity, and security requirements would be crucial. Without specific data on their prior experience with detention facilities, it's difficult to definitively gauge their capability. However, winning a full and open competition for a project of this magnitude suggests they met the government's pre-qualification and evaluation criteria, implying a level of demonstrated competence.

How does the awarded price of $38.5 million compare to the estimated cost or benchmark for similar detention center design-build projects?

Benchmarking this $38.5 million contract against similar federal detention center design-build projects is essential for a value-for-money assessment. Factors such as facility size (square footage, bed capacity), location (which impacts labor and material costs), and specific security features significantly influence project costs. A preliminary comparison suggests the price is within a reasonable range for a specialized facility of this nature, but a detailed analysis would require access to cost breakdowns, architectural plans, and data from comparable projects awarded by agencies like the Bureau of Prisons or the General Services Administration. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to contain costs, but the initial award price is the primary data point for this comparison.

What are the primary risks associated with this design-build contract, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

Key risks include potential scope creep, design errors or omissions, unforeseen site conditions, and contractor performance issues. Given the firm-fixed-price nature, scope creep is a significant concern, requiring rigorous change order management. Design errors could lead to costly rework or operational inefficiencies. Unforeseen site conditions, especially in remote or undeveloped areas, can impact schedules and budgets. Mitigation strategies typically involve detailed contract specifications, thorough design reviews, robust project management by the government, performance bonds, and clear communication protocols. The government's oversight and the contractor's own quality control processes are critical for managing these risks.

How effective is the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method in ensuring both competition and suitability of contractors for specialized projects like this?

This procurement method aims to balance broad competition with the need for specialized capabilities. 'Full and open' ensures a wide net is cast, while 'exclusion of sources' allows the agency to pre-qualify or set specific criteria, potentially excluding contractors lacking necessary experience or certifications. For specialized projects like detention facilities, this can prevent unqualified bidders from wasting resources and ensure that the competition is among capable firms. The presence of 5 bids suggests this method successfully attracted a sufficient number of qualified competitors, likely leading to a competitive outcome while ensuring the selected contractor possesses the requisite expertise for this complex project.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar infrastructure projects by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and how does this contract compare?

Analyzing historical spending for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) on facility construction and design-build projects is crucial for context. This $38.5 million contract represents a substantial investment. Understanding the frequency and average cost of previous projects, such as schools, housing, or administrative facilities, would reveal trends in BIA's capital improvement efforts. If the BIA has a history of underfunding infrastructure, this contract could signify a renewed focus or a response to a critical need. Conversely, if spending has been consistently high, this contract might be part of an ongoing, larger modernization program. Specific data on past BIA construction expenditures would be needed for a precise comparison.

What are the potential long-term operational and maintenance implications of the design choices made under this contract?

The long-term operational and maintenance (O&M) implications are heavily dependent on the specific design features selected for the detention center. Factors such as material durability, energy efficiency, security system integration, and ease of access for maintenance personnel will significantly impact future costs. A well-designed facility will minimize O&M expenses through robust construction and efficient systems. Conversely, a design that prioritizes initial cost savings over long-term durability or maintainability could lead to higher O&M expenditures for the Bureau of Indian Affairs over the facility's lifespan. The government's review and approval of the design phase are critical to ensuring O&M considerations are adequately addressed.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 140A1621R0033

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5045 LIST DR, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, 80919

Business Categories: Category Business, Government, Native American Tribal Government, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,467,874

Exercised Options: $38,467,874

Current Obligation: $38,467,874

Actual Outlays: $38,369,374

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 140A1618D0009

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline