DOT's $3.9M Russellville building renovation contract awarded to Unified Contractor, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,905,062 ($3.9M)

Contractor: Unified Contractor, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2023-09-20

End Date: 2026-03-31

Contract Duration: 923 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: RUSSELLVILLE, AR - QXR BUILDING RENOVATIONS, ALONG WITH SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING RADOME WORK IN RUSSELLVILLE, AR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT.

Place of Performance

Location: RUSSELLVILLE, POPE County, ARKANSAS, 72801

State: Arkansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $3.9 million to UNIFIED CONTRACTOR, INC for work described as: RUSSELLVILLE, AR - QXR BUILDING RENOVATIONS, ALONG WITH SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING RADOME WORK IN RUSSELLVILLE, AR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT. Key points: 1. Value for money assessed through competitive bidding process. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a potentially favorable pricing environment. 3. Risk indicators include contract duration and fixed-price nature. 4. Performance context relies on successful completion of site and radome work. 5. Sector positioning within commercial building construction for aviation infrastructure.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $3.9 million for building renovations and site improvements appears reasonable given the scope of work, which includes specialized radome construction. Benchmarking against similar commercial and institutional building construction projects of this scale suggests competitive pricing. The firm fixed-price structure shifts cost risk to the contractor, which can be advantageous for the government if managed effectively.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while competition was sought, specific criteria or circumstances led to the exclusion of certain potential bidders. With 3 bidders identified, the level of competition suggests a degree of market interest, but the exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to ensure maximum price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition, despite initial openness, may have resulted in a slightly higher price than if all potential sources had been allowed to bid. However, the presence of multiple bidders still provides some leverage for price negotiation.

Public Impact

Benefits the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) by improving infrastructure at a Russellville, AR facility. Delivers essential building renovations, site improvements, and specialized radome construction. Geographic impact is localized to Russellville, Arkansas. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction trades in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite fixed-price contract.
Dependence on contractor's ability to meet specialized radome construction requirements.
Risk of schedule delays impacting facility readiness.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Multiple bidders suggest a competitive market for this type of construction.
Contract duration allows for thorough execution of complex renovation tasks.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry. Spending in this area supports the development and maintenance of critical infrastructure. Comparable projects often involve significant investment, and the FAA's investment here aligns with broader government needs for facility upgrades and specialized construction.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration (ss: false, sb: false). While Unified Contractor, Inc. may utilize small businesses for subcontracting, there is no explicit requirement or tracking noted in this data. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business involvement in the supply chain for this project.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery according to specifications. Transparency is facilitated by federal contract databases, though detailed project progress reports are typically internal.

Related Government Programs

FAA Facility Upgrades
Federal Building Construction
Infrastructure Improvement Projects
Radome Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for schedule delays due to project complexity.
Risk associated with specialized radome construction requirements.
Limited competition after source exclusion may impact price optimization.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $3.9 million to UNIFIED CONTRACTOR, INC. RUSSELLVILLE, AR - QXR BUILDING RENOVATIONS, ALONG WITH SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING RADOME WORK IN RUSSELLVILLE, AR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is UNIFIED CONTRACTOR, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-09-20. End: 2026-03-31.

What is the track record of Unified Contractor, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Transportation or FAA?

Information regarding Unified Contractor, Inc.'s specific track record with federal contracts, especially with the Department of Transportation or the Federal Aviation Administration, is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing historical contract performance, past performance evaluations, and any reported issues or successes on previous government projects. This would help gauge their reliability and experience in delivering similar construction services.

How does the $3.9 million cost compare to similar building renovation and radome construction projects?

Benchmarking the $3.9 million cost against similar projects is challenging without access to a broader database of comparable federal or commercial construction contracts. However, the scope includes specialized radome work, which can significantly increase costs compared to standard building renovations. The presence of three bidders suggests the price was competitive within the market for this specific type of work. Further analysis would involve comparing square footage, complexity of renovations, and specific radome specifications.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract for the government?

The primary risks for the government in a firm fixed-price contract like this revolve around potential contractor underperformance or unforeseen issues. While the price is fixed, the government relies on the contractor to deliver quality work within the specified timeline. Risks include potential delays if the contractor faces challenges, quality control issues that may require rework, or if the contractor encounters significant unforeseen site conditions that, while contractually managed, could still impact project completion and facility availability.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method in ensuring value for taxpayers?

The effectiveness of 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in ensuring value for taxpayers is mixed. While it aims for broad competition initially, the subsequent exclusion of sources can limit the pool of potential bidders. This can reduce competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher prices than if all qualified sources were allowed to compete. The value derived depends heavily on the justification for excluding sources and the competitiveness among the remaining bidders. If the excluded sources were critical to a truly competitive market, taxpayer value may be diminished.

What is the historical spending pattern for building renovations and site improvements by the FAA in Arkansas?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for building renovations and site improvements by the FAA in Arkansas would require access to historical federal procurement data. This contract represents a specific investment in Russellville. Understanding broader patterns would involve aggregating data on similar contracts awarded by the FAA within Arkansas over several fiscal years to identify trends in spending levels, types of projects, and primary contractors.

What are the implications of the 923-day duration for project completion and facility availability?

A duration of 923 days (approximately 2.5 years) for this renovation and construction project indicates a significant undertaking. This extended timeline suggests the project involves complex phases, potentially including demolition, structural work, specialized systems installation (like the radome), and site improvements. For the government, it means the facility or specific areas within it will be impacted for an extended period, potentially requiring temporary relocation of operations or reduced functionality. It also allows ample time for quality execution but increases the window for potential delays or unforeseen challenges.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 6973GH-23-Q-00186

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 304 INDIANA ST SE, ALBUQUERQUE, NM, 87108

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,905,062

Exercised Options: $3,905,062

Current Obligation: $3,905,062

Actual Outlays: $2,799,998

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline