GSA's $74.8M Denver Federal Center project awarded to J.E. Dunn Construction, highlighting commercial building construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $74,808,237 ($74.8M)

Contractor: J. E. Dunn Construction Company

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2021-07-01

End Date: 2024-07-22

Contract Duration: 1,117 days

Daily Burn Rate: $67.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BUILDING 53 LIMITED SCOPE & TENANT BACKFILL PROJECT 1 DENVER FEDERAL CENTER, LAKEWOOD , CO 80225 B53

Place of Performance

Location: DENVER, JEFFERSON County, COLORADO, 80225

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $74.8 million to J. E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for work described as: BUILDING 53 LIMITED SCOPE & TENANT BACKFILL PROJECT 1 DENVER FEDERAL CENTER, LAKEWOOD , CO 80225 B53 Key points: 1. Value for money assessed through competitive bidding and firm-fixed-price structure. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a robust market for large-scale federal construction. 3. Risk indicators include project duration and potential for scope creep in tenant backfill. 4. Performance context relies on contractor's track record and project management. 5. Sector positioning within commercial and institutional building construction, a significant federal spending area.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $74.8 million for the BUILDING 53 project appears reasonable given the scope of commercial and institutional building construction. Benchmarking against similar large-scale federal building projects would provide a more precise value assessment. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests that the price is set, offering predictability for the government, but requires careful initial scope definition to avoid change orders.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with 8 bidders vying for the project. This level of competition is generally positive, suggesting a healthy market and potentially driving down costs. The presence of multiple bidders allows for a wider range of proposals and technical approaches to be considered, increasing the likelihood of selecting the best value.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition ensures that taxpayers benefit from a wide array of qualified contractors, fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more cost-effective solutions and better quality construction for federal facilities.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies requiring updated or backfilled facilities at the Denver Federal Center. Services delivered include construction and renovation to Building 53, enhancing its functionality and capacity. Geographic impact is localized to Lakewood, Colorado, supporting the Denver Federal Center campus. Workforce implications include job creation for construction trades and related support services in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the 'limited scope' is underestimated or expands.
Delays in project completion could impact agency operations at the facility.
Contractor performance risk is inherent in large construction projects.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Full and open competition suggests a strong pool of qualified bidders.
Project duration is defined, allowing for planning and resource allocation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector, a vital part of the U.S. economy and a significant area of federal spending. This sector encompasses the construction of office buildings, educational facilities, healthcare centers, and other non-residential structures. Federal spending in this area supports infrastructure modernization and agency operational needs.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside criterion for this large-scale project, as indicated by 'sb': false. While J.E. Dunn Construction Company is a large entity, the subcontracting opportunities generated by this project could still provide work for small businesses in various construction trades and material supply. Further analysis of subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the specific impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract, which sets clear financial terms. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases, though detailed project progress reports may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Construction
Public Works Projects
Government Facility Modernization
Denver Federal Center Operations

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep in tenant backfill projects.
Reliance on contractor's past performance for risk assessment.
Need for detailed benchmarking to confirm value for money.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $74.8 million to J. E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. BUILDING 53 LIMITED SCOPE & TENANT BACKFILL PROJECT 1 DENVER FEDERAL CENTER, LAKEWOOD , CO 80225 B53

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is J. E. DUNN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $74.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-07-01. End: 2024-07-22.

What is J. E. Dunn Construction Company's track record with similar federal projects?

J. E. Dunn Construction Company has a substantial history of undertaking large-scale construction projects, including those for federal agencies. Their portfolio often includes complex builds such as courthouses, federal offices, and military facilities. A review of their past performance on contracts with the General Services Administration (GSA) or other federal entities would reveal their on-time and on-budget completion rates, any significant disputes or claims, and client satisfaction. This historical data is crucial for assessing their capability to successfully execute the BUILDING 53 project within the specified parameters and budget.

How does the $74.8 million contract value compare to similar federal building projects in the Denver area?

Benchmarking the $74.8 million contract value against similar federal building projects in the Denver metropolitan area requires access to a database of comparable projects, including their scope, size (square footage), and construction type. Factors such as prevailing labor costs, material prices, and specific site conditions in Denver would influence this comparison. Without specific comparable project data, it's challenging to definitively state if this value represents excellent, fair, or concerning pricing. However, the full and open competition with 8 bidders suggests a market-driven price that is likely competitive.

What are the primary risks associated with the 'limited scope & tenant backfill' aspect of this project?

The primary risks associated with a 'limited scope & tenant backfill' project often revolve around scope definition and unforeseen conditions. 'Limited scope' can sometimes be an understatement, leading to change orders and cost increases if the initial assessment of work required is inaccurate. Tenant backfill introduces complexity as it involves adapting existing spaces for new occupants, which can uncover issues with existing infrastructure (HVAC, electrical, plumbing) not immediately apparent. Furthermore, coordinating with current or future tenants during construction can add logistical challenges. Effective risk mitigation requires detailed initial assessments, contingency planning, and robust change order management processes.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in managing costs for this type of construction project?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in managing costs for construction projects when the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly. It shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor, providing the government with cost certainty. For the BUILDING 53 project, the FFP structure incentivizes J. E. Dunn Construction Company to control costs and work efficiently to maximize their profit margin. However, if the 'limited scope' proves to be an underestimate or unforeseen conditions arise, the contractor may seek change orders, potentially increasing the total cost. The success of FFP here depends heavily on the thoroughness of the initial project scope definition and the contractor's ability to manage risks.

What is the historical spending trend for building construction by the GSA's Public Buildings Service in Colorado?

Analyzing historical spending trends for building construction by the GSA's Public Buildings Service (PBS) in Colorado would involve examining contract awards over several fiscal years. This would reveal patterns in the types of projects undertaken (new construction, renovation, repair), average contract values, and the frequency of awards. Such an analysis could indicate whether the $74.8 million award for Building 53 is an outlier, a typical investment, or part of an increasing/decreasing trend in PBS construction spending within the state. It would also highlight which construction NAICS codes (like 236220) are most frequently funded.

What are the implications of 'st': 'CO' and 'sn': 'COLORADO' for federal spending analysis?

The 'st': 'CO' and 'sn': 'COLORADO' designations indicate that the contract is being performed in the state of Colorado. For federal spending analysis, this is crucial for understanding geographic distribution of government expenditures, economic impact on specific regions, and potential concentration of contracts within certain states. It allows analysts to track federal investment in infrastructure and services at a state level, compare spending across different states, and identify states that are significant recipients of federal construction or service contracts. This information is vital for regional economic development assessments and budget allocation discussions.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: TWO STEP

Solicitation ID: BLDG53_DB_SOL

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1001 LOCUST, KANSAS CITY, MO, 64106

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $74,808,237

Exercised Options: $74,808,237

Current Obligation: $74,808,237

Actual Outlays: $74,320,295

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 28

Total Subaward Amount: $13,581,640

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline