Army awards $18.1M construction contract to Stronghold Engineering for Rio Salado project

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,461,602 ($11.5M)

Contractor: Stronghold Engineering Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-09-27

End Date: 2012-12-30

Contract Duration: 3,747 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200212!000884!96CE!CW09 !USA ENGINEER DIST LOS ANGELES !DACW0902C0014 !A!N! !N! !20020927!20030615!180672420!180672420!180672420!N!STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING INCORPO!3421 GATO COURT !RIVERSIDE !CA!92507!60200!013!04!RIO SALADO !MARICOPA !ARIZONA !+000000100000!N!N!000000000000!Y299!ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !5000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !234990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!004!K! !D!N!C! ! !N!A!Y!Y!B! ! ! !D!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: PHOENIX, MARICOPA County, ARIZONA, 85074

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.5 million to STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING INC for work described as: 200212!000884!96CE!CW09 !USA ENGINEER DIST LOS ANGELES !DACW0902C0014 !A!N! !N! !20020927!20030615!180672420!180672420!180672420!N!STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING INCORPO!3421 GATO COURT !RIVERSIDE !CA!92507!60200!013!04!RIO SALADO !MARIC… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for construction services, indicating a need for infrastructure development. 2. The contract value of $18.1 million suggests a significant project scope. 3. A firm fixed-price contract type implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. 4. The duration of the contract (over 10 years) suggests a long-term or phased construction effort. 5. The project is located in Arizona, potentially impacting local employment and businesses. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237990 points to heavy and civil engineering construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $18.1 million for construction services appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this nature, though specific benchmarks for the Rio Salado project are not readily available. Without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar Army Corps of Engineers projects in Arizona, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price structure shifts cost risk to the contractor, which can be beneficial for the government if managed effectively. However, the extended duration of the contract could introduce risks related to inflation and material cost fluctuations.

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, indicating a competitive bidding process. While the exact number of bidders is not specified, this approach generally promotes price discovery and allows the government to select the most advantageous offer. The 'after exclusion of sources' clause suggests specific criteria or requirements may have led to the exclusion of certain potential bidders, which warrants further investigation into the rationale.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process helps ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces. This approach aims to secure the best possible price and quality for the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the residents and businesses in Maricopa County, Arizona, who will benefit from the completed construction project. The contract delivers essential construction services, likely related to civil engineering or infrastructure development. The geographic impact is concentrated in Arizona, specifically within Maricopa County. The project is expected to create or sustain jobs in the construction sector within the local Arizona workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (over 10 years) may lead to cost escalation due to inflation and material price volatility.
The 'after exclusion of sources' clause in the competition type requires scrutiny to ensure fairness and prevent undue restrictions on potential bidders.
Lack of specific details on the project's scope and deliverables makes it difficult to fully assess performance risks and value.
The firm fixed-price nature, while beneficial for cost control, could lead to contractor issues if unforeseen complexities arise.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
Firm fixed-price contract type aligns government cost expectations with contractor performance.
The project is awarded to a specific contractor, indicating a clear line of accountability for delivery.
The contract is for construction, addressing a tangible need for infrastructure or facility development.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, a critical component of the nation's infrastructure. The U.S. construction market is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to public works projects. This contract, awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers, aligns with federal efforts to maintain and improve infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale civil engineering projects managed by federal agencies, considering factors like project type, location, and duration.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by a set-aside. However, the prime contractor, Stronghold Engineering Inc., may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their business operations, which could indirectly benefit the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army, likely managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract structure, where the contractor is responsible for delivering the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed project performance and oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Construction Projects
Federal Civil Engineering Contracts
Infrastructure Development Contracts
Department of Defense Construction Spending

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of cost overruns due to inflation.
Potential for scope creep or changes over the extended project timeline.
Need to verify justification for 'exclusion of sources' in competition.
Contract performance monitoring over a decade requires sustained oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.5 million to STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING INC. 200212!000884!96CE!CW09 !USA ENGINEER DIST LOS ANGELES !DACW0902C0014 !A!N! !N! !20020927!20030615!180672420!180672420!180672420!N!STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING INCORPO!3421 GATO COURT !RIVERSIDE !CA!92507!60200!013!04!RIO SALADO !MARICOPA !ARIZONA !+000000100000!N!N!000000000000!Y299!ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !5000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !234990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-09-27. End: 2012-12-30.

What specific type of construction is being undertaken for the Rio Salado project, and what are the key deliverables?

The provided data indicates the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 237990, which covers 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction.' This broad category can encompass a wide range of projects, such as water treatment facilities, dams, levees, canals, pipelines, and other non-building structures. The specific deliverables for the Rio Salado project are not detailed in the provided data. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work or associated documentation would be necessary to identify the precise nature of the construction, such as site preparation, earthmoving, concrete work, installation of specific infrastructure components, or environmental remediation.

How does the $18.1 million contract value compare to similar Army Corps of Engineers construction projects in Arizona?

Benchmarking the $18.1 million contract value against similar Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) projects in Arizona requires access to a database of historical USACE contracts within the state. Without such specific comparative data, it's challenging to definitively state whether this value is high, low, or average. However, $18.1 million represents a substantial investment, suggesting a project of significant scale or complexity. Factors influencing cost include the type of construction (e.g., dam, levee, utility), the specific location's environmental conditions, labor costs in Arizona, and the duration of the project. A detailed analysis would involve comparing projects with similar NAICS codes (237990) and project scopes awarded by USACE in Arizona over a relevant timeframe.

What are the potential risks associated with the over 10-year duration of this contract?

A contract duration spanning over 10 years (3747 days) presents several potential risks for both the government and the contractor. For the government, the primary risks include potential cost escalation due to inflation, changes in material prices, and evolving technological or regulatory requirements that may necessitate contract modifications. There's also a risk of contractor performance degradation over such a long period, or potential contractor insolvency. For the contractor, the risk lies in accurately forecasting costs and resource needs over an extended timeframe, managing workforce stability, and adapting to unforeseen site conditions or project scope changes. The firm fixed-price nature exacerbates these risks for the contractor, as they bear the brunt of cost overruns.

What does the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' clause imply for the bidding process and potential bidders?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' clause indicates that the solicitation was made available to all responsible sources, but certain sources were excluded from consideration. This exclusion must be justified based on specific criteria outlined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), such as national security concerns, specific technical capabilities, or unique qualifications. It implies that while the competition was broad, it was not entirely unrestricted. For potential bidders, it means they needed to meet the specific criteria for inclusion. For the government, it suggests a deliberate effort to ensure that the selected contractor possessed particular attributes deemed essential for the project's success, while still aiming for competitive pricing.

What is the historical spending pattern for Stronghold Engineering Inc. with the Department of Defense?

The provided data only pertains to a single contract awarded to Stronghold Engineering Inc. by the Department of Defense (specifically, the Department of the Army). To understand their historical spending patterns with the DoD, one would need to access broader federal procurement databases (like USASpending.gov) to review all contracts awarded to this entity over time. This would reveal the total value of contracts, the agencies involved, the types of services or goods provided, and the consistency of their contracting relationship with the DoD. Without this broader dataset, it's impossible to establish a historical spending pattern beyond this one instance.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3421 GATO COURT, RIVERSIDE, CA, 92507

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline