VA awards $2.57M contract for building modernization at Milwaukee VAMC, highlighting electrical infrastructure needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,572,497 ($2.6M)

Contractor: Progressive Construction Services LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs

Start Date: 2023-04-17

End Date: 2026-04-15

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 695-21-104 REPLACE BLDG 123 MH GEN AT VAMC MILWAUKEE

Place of Performance

Location: MILWAUKEE, MILWAUKEE County, WISCONSIN, 53295

State: Wisconsin Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Veterans Affairs obligated $2.6 million to PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC for work described as: 695-21-104 REPLACE BLDG 123 MH GEN AT VAMC MILWAUKEE Key points: 1. Contract focuses on essential building modernization, suggesting a need to upgrade aging facilities. 2. The award to a single contractor indicates a specific need or a competitive process that yielded one strong bid. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability for the government. 4. The project duration of nearly three years suggests a complex scope of work. 5. Geographic focus on Wisconsin aligns with VA's mission to serve veterans nationwide.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $2.57 million for building modernization appears reasonable for a project of this scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar VA modernization projects would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The firm fixed-price structure helps mitigate cost overrun risks for the government, assuming the initial scope was well-defined.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' which suggests that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources may have been excluded for specific reasons, or the initial solicitation may have had limitations. The number of bidders is not specified, but this contracting method can sometimes lead to less competitive pricing compared to unrestricted full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: This limited competition approach may result in slightly higher costs for taxpayers if it restricts the pool of qualified and competitive bidders.

Public Impact

Veterans receiving care at the Milwaukee VAMC will benefit from improved facilities and potentially more reliable infrastructure. The project will involve electrical contracting services, contributing to the modernization of critical building systems. The geographic impact is concentrated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, serving the local veteran population. The contract is expected to create or sustain jobs within the electrical contracting and construction sectors in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial building assessments were incomplete.
Reliance on a single contractor for a multi-year project carries execution risk.
Ensuring compliance with all VA facility standards and regulations.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Focus on essential infrastructure upgrades addresses critical needs.
Project duration allows for thorough execution and quality control.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction and Facilities Maintenance sector, specifically focusing on electrical infrastructure upgrades. The market for such services is robust, driven by ongoing needs for modernization and compliance across federal facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks for building modernization projects at federal installations vary widely based on size and complexity, but this award appears to be within a typical range for significant electrical system overhauls.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the prime contractor, PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC, is not explicitly identified as a small business in the provided data. There is no information on subcontracting plans, so the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear, though larger projects often involve subcontracting opportunities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by the Department of Veterans Affairs contracting officers and project managers. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability by fixing the cost. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases, but specific details on ongoing oversight activities or Inspector General involvement would require further investigation.

Related Government Programs

VA Major Medical Facility Lease Program
VA Capital Asset Realignment and Enhancement Act (CAREA)
Federal Building Modernization Projects
Department of Veterans Affairs Healthcare Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion
Potential for unforeseen conditions in existing infrastructure
Project duration increases risk exposure

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Veterans Affairs awarded $2.6 million to PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC. 695-21-104 REPLACE BLDG 123 MH GEN AT VAMC MILWAUKEE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (Department of Veterans Affairs).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-04-17. End: 2026-04-15.

What is the track record of PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC with the Department of Veterans Affairs?

A review of federal procurement data would be necessary to fully assess the track record of PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC with the Department of Veterans Affairs. This would involve examining past contract awards, performance evaluations (if available), and any history of disputes or contract modifications. Without specific past performance data, it's difficult to gauge their reliability and experience specifically with VA projects of this scale and complexity. However, being awarded a contract of this value suggests they have met the basic qualifications and demonstrated some level of capability to the agency.

How does the awarded price compare to similar building modernization contracts at other VA facilities?

To benchmark the $2.57 million award, a comparative analysis of similar building modernization contracts at other VA facilities would be required. This analysis should consider factors such as the scope of work (e.g., electrical, HVAC, structural), the size and type of facility, the duration of the contract, and the geographic location, as labor and material costs can vary regionally. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable VA projects and their associated costs, it is challenging to definitively state whether this contract represents excellent, good, or fair value. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests an effort to control costs.

What are the primary risks associated with this specific building modernization project?

The primary risks associated with this building modernization project include potential unforeseen conditions within the existing building infrastructure that could lead to scope creep and cost increases, despite the firm fixed-price contract. There's also the risk of project delays due to the complexity of working within an operational healthcare facility, requiring careful coordination to minimize disruption to patient care. Contractor performance risk, ensuring the quality of work meets VA standards, and potential supply chain issues for specialized electrical components are also considerations. The duration of nearly three years increases the exposure to these risks.

How effective are VA's procurement processes in ensuring competitive pricing for facility modernization contracts?

The effectiveness of VA's procurement processes in ensuring competitive pricing for facility modernization contracts can vary. While the VA utilizes various competition strategies, including full and open competition, the specific method used for this contract ('FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES') suggests potential limitations that might impact the level of competition. Factors such as the specialized nature of the work, the availability of qualified contractors in a specific region, and the clarity of the solicitation requirements all play a role. Analyzing a broader sample of VA modernization contracts and their resulting pricing against market benchmarks would provide a more comprehensive assessment of overall effectiveness.

What is the historical spending trend for building modernization at the Milwaukee VAMC?

Determining the historical spending trend for building modernization specifically at the Milwaukee VAMC would require accessing and analyzing past contract awards and expenditures for that particular facility over several fiscal years. This data would reveal patterns of investment in infrastructure upgrades, identify recurring needs, and potentially highlight periods of significant modernization activity versus periods of lower investment. Without access to this granular historical spending data for the Milwaukee VAMC, it is not possible to establish a trend or compare current spending to past levels.

What are the implications of the 'exclusion of sources' clause on this contract's competition?

The 'exclusion of sources' clause in this contract indicates that while the competition was intended to be 'full and open,' certain potential bidders were deliberately excluded. The reasons for exclusion could range from specific technical requirements that only a subset of contractors could meet, to past performance issues, or even national security considerations. This exclusion inherently limits the pool of competitors, which can potentially reduce the downward pressure on pricing that a truly unrestricted full and open competition might generate. The impact on taxpayers depends on whether the excluded sources were genuinely less qualified or capable, or if their exclusion was arbitrary and reduced viable competition.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Building Equipment Contractors › Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors

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: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: 36C25222B0028

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 944 N PARKER DR, JANESVILLE, WI, 53545

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,572,497

Exercised Options: $2,572,497

Current Obligation: $2,572,497

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline