GSA's $88M Greenville Courthouse Construction Contract Awarded to Brasfield & Gorrie LLC Under Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $88,077,944 ($88.1M)

Contractor: Brasfield & Gorrie LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2017-09-25

End Date: 2022-02-17

Contract Duration: 1,606 days

Daily Burn Rate: $54.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE INCENTIVE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF NOT INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS CONSTRUCTOR CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW U.S. COURTHOUSE IN GREENVILLE, SC.

Place of Performance

Location: GREENVILLE, GREENVILLE County, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29601

State: South Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $88.1 million to BRASFIELD & GORRIE LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF NOT INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS CONSTRUCTOR CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW U.S. COURTHOUSE IN GREENVILLE, SC. Key points: 1. The contract utilized a Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) pricing structure, aiming to balance cost control with contractor performance. 2. Awarded for the construction of a new U.S. Courthouse in Greenville, SC, this project addresses federal infrastructure needs. 3. The duration of the contract was 1606 days, indicating a significant, multi-year construction effort. 4. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction. 6. The contract value of $88,007,944 represents a substantial investment in federal facilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $88 million for a new federal courthouse appears substantial, but a direct value-for-money assessment requires comparison with similar courthouse construction projects of comparable size and complexity. The Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) structure suggests an attempt to manage costs while incentivizing performance, but the final cost relative to initial estimates and market benchmarks is crucial for a complete value assessment. Without detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to industry standards for construction management as constructor (CMc) services, it is difficult to definitively benchmark the pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant construction project. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a broader range of innovative solutions, but two bids still provide a basis for price discovery and selection.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and improve the quality of services received.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal judicial services, which will gain a new, modern courthouse facility. The project delivers essential infrastructure for the U.S. court system in Greenville, South Carolina. The geographic impact is localized to Greenville, South Carolina, providing a significant boost to local construction employment and related industries. The construction activities will likely create numerous jobs for skilled tradespeople and construction workers in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns inherent in fixed-price incentive contracts if performance targets are not met efficiently.
The multi-year duration of the contract introduces risks related to material cost fluctuations and labor availability.
Complexity of constructing a federal courthouse may present unforeseen challenges impacting schedule and budget.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a fair and transparent procurement process.
The use of a Fixed Price Incentive contract aims to align contractor incentives with government objectives.
The project addresses a clear need for updated federal judicial infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

The construction industry, particularly for large-scale public infrastructure projects, is characterized by significant capital investment, complex supply chains, and specialized labor requirements. Federal courthouse construction falls under the commercial and institutional building construction sector. The market size for federal building construction is substantial, with agencies like the General Services Administration (GSA) managing a vast portfolio of properties. This contract fits within the broader trend of modernizing federal facilities to improve efficiency and security.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business set-asides were not utilized for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the contract was not specifically targeted towards small businesses. While there are no direct indications of subcontracting plans for small businesses from the provided data, large federal construction contracts often include subcontracting goals. The absence of a small business set-aside means that large businesses were the primary focus of the competition, and the impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether the prime contractor engages small businesses for specialized services or materials.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. Mechanisms likely include regular progress reports, site inspections, and financial reviews. Accountability is built into the Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) contract structure, which links contractor profit to performance against cost and schedule targets. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and public reporting, although detailed project-specific oversight activities may not always be publicly disclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Courthouse Construction Projects
General Services Administration (GSA) Building Projects
Public Buildings Service Contracts
Fixed Price Incentive Contracts
Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to FPI structure and long duration.
Risk of schedule delays impacting delivery of judicial services.
Market volatility in construction materials and labor costs.
Adequacy of competition for a project of this scale.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $88.1 million to BRASFIELD & GORRIE LLC. IGF::OT::IGF NOT INHERENTLY GOVERNMENTAL, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS CONSTRUCTOR CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW U.S. COURTHOUSE IN GREENVILLE, SC.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BRASFIELD & GORRIE LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $88.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2017-09-25. End: 2022-02-17.

What is the track record of Brasfield & Gorrie LLC in completing federal construction projects of similar scale and complexity?

Brasfield & Gorrie LLC has a significant track record in large-scale construction, including numerous public and private sector projects. While specific details on their past federal courthouse construction projects of this exact scale are not provided in the summary data, their general experience in commercial and institutional building construction suggests a capacity to handle such endeavors. A deeper analysis would involve reviewing their past performance on GSA contracts or similar federal projects, examining client satisfaction, adherence to budget and schedule, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. Their extensive portfolio indicates they are a major player in the construction industry, capable of undertaking complex federal builds.

How does the awarded amount of $88,007,944 compare to the estimated cost or benchmark for constructing a federal courthouse of this size?

Benchmarking the $88 million award requires comparing it against similar federal courthouse construction projects in terms of square footage, security requirements, and specific functional needs. Without access to the original cost estimates or data on comparable projects, a precise comparison is difficult. However, the Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) contract type suggests that the government aimed to control costs while allowing for some flexibility. The number of bids (2) indicates a moderate level of competition, which can influence pricing. A thorough analysis would involve consulting GSA's historical cost data for similar facilities or industry cost estimating services to determine if this award represents good value for the taxpayer.

What are the primary risks associated with a Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) contract for a project of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risks with an FPI contract for a large, multi-year project like a federal courthouse revolve around cost control and performance alignment. For the government, the risk is that the final cost could exceed the target price if the contractor incurs higher-than-expected costs and fails to meet performance incentives, leading to a higher final price within the negotiated ceiling. For the contractor, the risk lies in managing costs effectively to achieve the target profit, as deviations from performance targets can reduce their earnings. The 1606-day duration increases the exposure to market volatility in material prices and labor availability, which can impact the contractor's ability to meet cost targets and performance incentives, potentially leading to increased costs for the government.

What is the expected impact of this new courthouse on the judicial services and community in Greenville, SC?

The construction of a new U.S. Courthouse in Greenville, SC, is expected to significantly enhance the delivery of federal judicial services. A modern facility typically offers improved security, better accessibility for the public and legal professionals, and more efficient operational spaces for judges and court staff. This can lead to smoother court proceedings and a better overall experience for those interacting with the justice system. For the local community, the project represents a substantial investment, creating numerous construction-related jobs during its development phase and potentially boosting the local economy through increased economic activity. The presence of a new federal building can also be a symbol of federal commitment to the region.

How does the competition level (2 bidders) for this contract potentially affect pricing and contractor selection?

A competition level with two bidders for a contract of this magnitude suggests a moderate degree of market interest. While more bidders generally lead to more aggressive pricing and a wider array of technical solutions, two bidders still provide a basis for price discovery and comparison. The government can evaluate the proposals from both competitors to determine which offers the best value, considering both price and technical merit. However, with limited competition, there is a reduced likelihood of uncovering the absolute lowest price achievable in a more crowded market. The government's negotiation strategy and the specific requirements of the solicitation would play a crucial role in maximizing value under these conditions.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: GS-04-P-16-BV-C-7005

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE INCENTIVE (L)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3021 7TH AVE S, BIRMINGHAM, AL, 35233

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $88,077,944

Exercised Options: $88,077,944

Current Obligation: $88,077,944

Actual Outlays: $1,447,303

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline