GSA awards $1.6M contract for PACS installation in Wichita, KS, to BKM Construction LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $162,292 ($162.3K)

Contractor: BKM Construction LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2025-10-30

End Date: 2026-01-28

Contract Duration: 90 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.8K/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: DCMA PACS INSTALL DCMA OFFICE, LUX BUILDING, 120 EAST 1ST ST NORTH, WICHITA, KS 67202 THE VENDOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL THE LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SUPERVISION TO INSTALL A NEW PACS SYSTEM AT THE DCMA OFFICE.

Place of Performance

Location: WICHITA, SEDGWICK County, KANSAS, 67202

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $162,292 to BKM CONSTRUCTION LLC for work described as: DCMA PACS INSTALL DCMA OFFICE, LUX BUILDING, 120 EAST 1ST ST NORTH, WICHITA, KS 67202 THE VENDOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL THE LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SUPERVISION TO INSTALL A NEW PACS SYSTEM AT THE DCMA OFFICE. Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a building construction project of this scope. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Project duration is relatively short, indicating a focused scope of work. 4. The contract is a delivery order under a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract, common for construction services. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code points to commercial building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $1.62 million for a PACS installation is within a typical range for commercial building construction projects of this size. Benchmarking against similar projects would require more detailed scope information, but the price appears to be a firm fixed price, which limits cost escalation risks for the government. The delivery order structure suggests it's part of a pre-competed IDIQ, implying some level of pre-negotiated rates or pricing.

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,' which is a standard method for ensuring broad market participation. While the specific number of bidders is not provided, this approach generally leads to a competitive environment, allowing multiple qualified contractors to submit proposals. This method aims to achieve the best value for the government by leveraging market competition.

Taxpayer Impact: This competitive approach helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down prices through market forces, rather than being awarded without a robust bidding process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) office in Wichita, KS, which will receive an upgraded PACS system. The service delivered is the installation of a new Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS), crucial for medical imaging and data management. The geographic impact is localized to the DCMA office located at 120 East 1st Street North, Wichita, KS. The project will likely involve construction workers and potentially specialized technicians for the PACS installation, impacting the local workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the PACS system's technical requirements and integration.
Potential for unforeseen site conditions during construction that could impact schedule or cost.
Dependence on BKM Construction LLC's past performance and capacity for this specific type of installation.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive pricing environment.
Firm Fixed Price contract type mitigates cost overrun risks for the government.
Short project duration suggests efficient project management and execution.
Delivery order structure implies pre-qualification of the contractor and potentially pre-negotiated terms.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically related to the installation of specialized systems within government facilities. The construction market is diverse, with significant government spending on infrastructure and facility upgrades. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within GSA's own construction and renovation portfolios or through industry cost estimating databases for similar building types and system installations.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded to BKM Construction LLC, and there is no indication of a small business set-aside. The contract is also not marked as being awarded to a small business. Therefore, the direct impact on small business set-asides is minimal for this specific award. However, the prime contractor may engage small businesses for subcontracting opportunities, depending on their own business practices and the nature of the work required.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), likely through its Public Buildings Service. The firm fixed price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

GSA Public Buildings Service Construction Contracts
Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Facility Upgrades
Federal IT Infrastructure Projects
Medical Imaging System Installations

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if technical requirements are not clearly defined.
Risk of contractor performance issues if past performance is weak.
Dependency on accurate site assessments to avoid unforeseen construction challenges.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $162,292 to BKM CONSTRUCTION LLC. DCMA PACS INSTALL DCMA OFFICE, LUX BUILDING, 120 EAST 1ST ST NORTH, WICHITA, KS 67202 THE VENDOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL THE LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SUPERVISION TO INSTALL A NEW PACS SYSTEM AT THE DCMA OFFICE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BKM CONSTRUCTION LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $162,292.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-10-30. End: 2026-01-28.

What is the specific type and model of the PACS system being installed, and what are its key technical specifications?

The provided data does not specify the exact type or model of the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) being installed. It only states that a 'new PACS system' is required. To fully assess the value and technical suitability, detailed specifications regarding image resolution, storage capacity, network compatibility, user interface, and integration capabilities with existing or future medical systems would be necessary. Without this information, it's difficult to benchmark the technology or its associated installation costs against industry standards or alternative solutions. Further inquiry with the contracting agency (GSA) would be needed to obtain the technical specifications outlined in the Statement of Work.

How does the $1.62 million contract value compare to similar PACS installation projects in government or commercial facilities?

Benchmarking the $1.62 million contract value requires comparing it to similar projects, which is challenging with the limited data. Factors influencing cost include the size of the facility, the volume of images to be stored and accessed, the required image resolution, the complexity of integration with existing IT infrastructure, and the specific features of the PACS software and hardware. A typical PACS installation can range from tens of thousands to millions of dollars. For a government office installation, this value seems plausible, especially if it includes significant hardware, software licensing, and substantial construction/integration work. However, without knowing the specific scope, number of users, and technical requirements, a precise comparison is difficult. Reviewing GSA's historical data for similar facility upgrades or consulting industry cost estimators would provide a more robust comparison.

What is the track record of BKM Construction LLC in completing similar government construction or specialized system installation projects on time and within budget?

Information regarding BKM Construction LLC's specific track record for similar government projects is not detailed in the provided data. As the award was made under full and open competition, it implies that BKM Construction LLC met the minimum qualifications set forth in the solicitation. To assess their reliability, one would typically review their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), project history, and any reported issues on previous federal contracts. A strong performance history on comparable projects would indicate a lower risk for this contract. Conversely, a history of delays, cost overruns, or quality issues would raise concerns about project execution.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a construction project involving specialized system installation?

While a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is generally advantageous for the government by capping costs, it carries specific risks, particularly in construction. The primary risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or materials to maintain profitability if unforeseen issues arise or if their initial cost estimate was too low. For a specialized system installation like PACS, integration complexities or unexpected site conditions (e.g., structural issues, inadequate power/cooling) could lead to disputes or demands for change orders if not adequately addressed in the contract's scope. The government's risk is mitigated by a well-defined SOW, clear specifications, and robust oversight during execution. The short 90-day duration might also indicate a relatively contained scope, potentially reducing some of these risks.

How does the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' method differ from standard full and open competition, and what does it imply for price discovery?

The term 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' (often associated with FAR 6.102(d)(3)) typically means that the agency intended to use full and open competition but, for specific reasons, excluded certain sources from consideration. This exclusion must be justified and documented. It differs from standard full and open competition (FAR 6.102(b)) where all responsible sources are permitted to compete without restriction. The implication for price discovery is that while competition is still present, the pool of potential bidders is smaller than in unrestricted full and open competition. This could potentially lead to less aggressive pricing compared to a scenario where all qualified vendors could participate, although the extent of this impact depends heavily on the number of bidders ultimately submitting proposals and the specific market dynamics.

What is the significance of this contract being a 'delivery order' under a larger IDIQ contract?

This contract being a 'delivery order' signifies that it is a task-specific order issued under a pre-existing Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract. IDIQ contracts establish terms and conditions, including pricing structures and performance requirements, for services or supplies to be delivered over a period. The government benefits from the flexibility to order specific quantities as needed, while contractors are guaranteed a certain level of business. For this PACS installation, it means the underlying IDIQ contract likely covers a range of construction or facility services, and this specific order defines the scope, price, and delivery timeline for the Wichita DCMA office project. This approach streamlines the procurement process for individual task orders once the initial IDIQ contract has been competed.

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: 47PG0525Q0007

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 501 S 5TH ST, LEAVENWORTH, KS, 66048

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $162,292

Exercised Options: $162,292

Current Obligation: $162,292

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47PG1024D0005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline