GSA awards $388K contract for architectural services to The Miller/Hull Partnership, LLP for Arizona canopy construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $388,264 ($388.3K)

Contractor: THE Miller/Hull Partnership, LLP

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-04-10

End Date: 2026-11-30

Contract Duration: 234 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CM SERVICES FOR CANOPY CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENT

Place of Performance

Location: NOGALES, SANTA CRUZ County, ARIZONA, 85621

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $388,264.4 to THE MILLER/HULL PARTNERSHIP, LLP for work described as: CM SERVICES FOR CANOPY CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENT Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is for architectural services, a critical component in construction projects. 3. Fixed-price contract type helps manage cost certainty for the government. 4. The contract duration is relatively short, indicating a focused scope of work. 5. The award is a delivery order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract. 6. The geographic focus is Arizona, potentially benefiting local architectural and construction firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $388,264.40 for architectural services appears reasonable for a project of this nature, especially considering it's a delivery order which might represent a specific phase or component of a larger requirement. Benchmarking against similar architectural service contracts for public buildings would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure is generally favorable for controlling costs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. This method typically fosters a competitive environment, potentially leading to better pricing and quality. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' designation implies a robust competition was sought.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by promoting a level playing field, encouraging multiple firms to offer their best pricing and services, which can lead to cost savings and higher quality outcomes.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the General Services Administration (GSA) and potentially the public users of the facility where the canopy will be constructed. The services delivered include architectural design and potentially oversight for canopy construction. The geographic impact is localized to Arizona, where the construction will take place. The contract supports the architecture and engineering sector, potentially creating or sustaining jobs for architects and related professionals.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if the canopy requirement is not clearly defined.
Dependence on the contractor's ability to meet deadlines and quality standards.
Risk of cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during the design or construction phase, despite the fixed-price nature.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive selection process.
Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
The Miller/Hull Partnership, LLP is likely an established firm with relevant experience.
The contract is for architectural services, a foundational element for successful construction.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the Architectural Services industry (NAICS code 541310), a segment of the broader Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) sector. This sector is characterized by project-based work, requiring specialized design expertise. Spending in this area by agencies like GSA is crucial for maintaining and upgrading federal facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other GSA or agency contracts for similar architectural design services for building components or renovations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the competition was open to firms of all sizes. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether larger firms like The Miller/Hull Partnership, LLP engage small businesses as subcontractors for specialized tasks.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Public Buildings Service. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed project specifics might be less accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building and Facilities Modernization
Architectural and Engineering Services
Public Works Construction
General Services Administration (GSA) Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined.
Schedule adherence risk due to short contract duration.
Integration risk between design and construction phases.
Dependence on contractor's past performance and expertise.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $388,264.4 to THE MILLER/HULL PARTNERSHIP, LLP. CM SERVICES FOR CANOPY CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE MILLER/HULL PARTNERSHIP, LLP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $388,264.4.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-10. End: 2026-11-30.

What is the track record of The Miller/Hull Partnership, LLP with federal contracts, particularly with the GSA?

A review of federal contract databases would be necessary to fully assess The Miller/Hull Partnership, LLP's track record. This would involve examining past awards, performance reviews, and any history of contract disputes or modifications. Understanding their experience with similar projects, especially those managed by the GSA or involving public infrastructure, would provide insight into their reliability and capability. Specific data on their past federal contract performance, including on-time delivery and adherence to budget on previous projects, is crucial for a comprehensive assessment.

How does the awarded amount compare to the estimated cost or market rates for similar architectural services?

To benchmark the value, one would compare the $388,264.40 award against the GSA's internal cost estimates for this specific canopy construction requirement, if available. Additionally, market research on typical fees for architectural services for similar-sized public projects in Arizona would be informative. Factors such as the complexity of the design, the required level of detail, and the specific expertise needed would influence market rates. Without access to the government's estimate or detailed market data, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the fixed-price nature suggests a defined scope was priced competitively.

What are the potential risks associated with this specific contract, beyond standard project risks?

Beyond typical construction risks like unforeseen site conditions or material price fluctuations, specific risks for this contract could include the clarity and completeness of the 'canopy construction requirement' itself. If the requirement is vague, it could lead to scope creep or disputes. Another risk is the integration of the architectural design with the actual construction phase, especially if different entities handle each. The short duration (less than a year) also implies a tight schedule, increasing the risk of delays if any part of the process encounters significant hurdles. The reliance on a single delivery order also raises questions about its place within a potentially larger, unawarded IDIQ.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' process in ensuring optimal outcomes for this type of architectural service contract?

The 'full and open competition' process is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring optimal outcomes in federal contracting, as it maximizes the pool of potential bidders, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and high-quality proposals. For architectural services, this means GSA can solicit bids from a wide range of qualified firms, fostering innovation and allowing them to select the best value. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the clarity of the solicitation documents and the evaluation criteria used. A well-executed full and open competition should lead to a fair price and a design that meets GSA's needs.

What is the historical spending pattern for architectural services by the GSA's Public Buildings Service in Arizona?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for architectural services by GSA's Public Buildings Service in Arizona would involve querying federal procurement data for similar contracts over the past several fiscal years. This would reveal the average contract values, the types of architectural services most frequently procured, and the primary contractors awarded these services. Understanding this historical context helps in assessing whether the current $388,264.40 award is consistent with past spending levels, indicative of a trend, or an outlier. It can also highlight any shifts in procurement strategies or service needs within the region.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102

Solicitation ID: 47PH5326R0003

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 71 COLUMBIA ST STE 600, SEATTLE, WA, 98104

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $388,264

Exercised Options: $388,264

Current Obligation: $388,264

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47PA0323D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline