Restroom renovation contract awarded to Sealaska Constructors LLC for over $2.1 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,121,591 ($2.1M)

Contractor: Sealaska Constructors LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2024-08-06

End Date: 2026-03-31

Contract Duration: 602 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: RENOVATE RESTROOMS BLDG 2

Place of Performance

Location: LAWRENCE, DOUGLAS County, KANSAS, 66046

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $2.1 million to SEALASKA CONSTRUCTORS LLC for work described as: RENOVATE RESTROOMS BLDG 2 Key points: 1. Value for money assessed against similar renovation projects. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open process. 3. Risk indicators include project duration and fixed-price nature. 4. Performance context relies on contractor's past delivery. 5. Sector positioning within commercial building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $2.1 million for restroom renovations appears within a reasonable range for a project of this scope, though specific benchmarking against identical facilities is difficult without more detailed project specifications. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts risk to the contractor, which can be beneficial for cost certainty if the scope is well-defined. However, it also means potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise, impacting the ultimate value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' suggesting an initial limited approach that was broadened. The presence of two bidders indicates some level of competition, but the exact number of potential bidders and the reasons for the initial exclusion of sources warrant further investigation to ensure optimal price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive process, while not fully open from the outset, likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers than a sole-source award. However, understanding the full extent of competition is key to maximizing taxpayer savings.

Public Impact

Federal employees and visitors will benefit from updated restroom facilities. Services delivered include renovation and construction of building infrastructure. Geographic impact is localized to the facility in Kansas. Workforce implications include construction jobs for the awarded contractor and potential subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in renovation projects can lead to cost increases.
Contractor's past performance on similar projects needs verification.
The 'exclusion of sources' clause requires scrutiny to ensure fairness.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty if scope is managed.
Competition, even if limited initially, suggests a degree of market responsiveness.
Project duration is defined, allowing for planning and oversight.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Spending in this area is driven by the need to maintain and upgrade federal facilities. Benchmarking against similar government renovation projects would provide a clearer picture of cost-effectiveness, but typical projects of this nature can range from hundreds of thousands to several million dollars depending on scale and complexity.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication of a small business set-aside for this contract, nor are there explicit subcontracting requirements mentioned. This suggests that small businesses may not be directly benefiting from this specific award, and their participation would likely be through the prime contractor's own procurement decisions.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education. Accountability measures are tied to the firm-fixed-price contract terms and delivery schedule. Transparency is facilitated by the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), where contract details are publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Renovations
Bureau of Indian Affairs Construction Projects
General Services Administration (GSA) Facility Management

Risk Flags

Potential for unforeseen conditions in renovation projects.
Limited number of bidders (2) may impact price competitiveness.
Need to verify contractor's past performance on similar projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $2.1 million to SEALASKA CONSTRUCTORS LLC. RENOVATE RESTROOMS BLDG 2

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SEALASKA CONSTRUCTORS 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 $2.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-08-06. End: 2026-03-31.

What is the track record of Sealaska Constructors LLC on similar federal contracts?

A review of Sealaska Constructors LLC's contract history within the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would be necessary to assess their track record. Specifically, one would look for past performance on projects of similar size, scope (restroom renovations, building construction), and complexity. Key metrics to examine include on-time delivery, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any instances of disputes or contract modifications. A history of successful project completion would indicate lower risk for this current contract, while a pattern of issues might raise concerns about their capacity or management.

How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar restroom renovation projects?

To benchmark the $2.1 million price, one would need to compare it against recent, similar government contracts for restroom renovations, ideally within the same geographic region (Kansas) and of comparable size (602 days duration). Industry cost estimating databases and construction cost indices can also provide market rate context. Factors such as the extent of renovation (e.g., plumbing, fixtures, accessibility upgrades), materials used, and labor costs in the specific area will influence the price. Without detailed specifications, a precise comparison is challenging, but the price should be evaluated against the scope of work to determine if it represents good value.

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

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, especially for renovations, is the potential for unforeseen issues that increase costs for the contractor, potentially leading to delays or quality compromises if the contractor attempts to cut corners. For this specific contract, risks include discovering hidden structural problems, asbestos, or outdated plumbing/electrical systems during demolition that were not accounted for in the initial scope. The contractor bears the financial risk of cost overruns, but if these issues are significant, it could impact project completion. The 602-day duration also presents a risk of market fluctuations in material costs.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause in ensuring fair pricing?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause is intended to broaden competition after an initial, more restrictive approach. Its effectiveness in ensuring fair pricing depends heavily on the reasons for the initial exclusion and the subsequent solicitation process. If the exclusion was based on specific, justifiable technical requirements that were later relaxed, it could indicate a less than optimal initial market assessment. The fact that it ultimately became 'full and open' suggests an effort to maximize competition. However, the number of bidders (two) is relatively low, which might limit the downward pressure on price compared to a scenario with numerous competitive bids.

What is the historical spending trend for restroom renovations by the Bureau of Indian Affairs?

Analyzing historical spending data for restroom renovations by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) would provide context for this $2.1 million contract. This would involve examining FPDS data for similar projects over the past several fiscal years to identify average contract values, project durations, and the number of bidders. Significant deviations from historical averages, either higher or lower, could signal changes in market conditions, project complexity, or procurement strategies. Understanding this trend can help assess whether the current contract represents a typical investment or an outlier.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 140A2324R0053

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1200 6TH AVE STE 800, SEATTLE, WA, 98101

Business Categories: Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,121,591

Exercised Options: $2,121,591

Current Obligation: $2,121,591

Actual Outlays: $2,121,591

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 140A1621D0050

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline