DoD awards $156M construction contract for airfield structures, with a 5-bid competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,619,517 ($15.6M)

Contractor: W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-03-20

End Date: 2008-08-26

Contract Duration: 1,986 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200307!000369!2100!HA22 !USPFO FOR MISSISSIPPI !DAHA2203C0002 !A!N! !N! !20030320!20040927!004032132!004032132!017041232!N!W G YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION!ONE GULLY AVENUE !PHILADELPHIA !MS!39350!36000!049!28!JACKSON !HINDS !MISS !+000014276400!N!N!000000000000!Y129!OTHER AIRFIELD STRUCTURES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !236220!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!005!A! !D!N!C! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: HATTIESBURG, FORREST County, MISSISSIPPI, 39407

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.6 million to W. G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for work described as: 200307!000369!2100!HA22 !USPFO FOR MISSISSIPPI !DAHA2203C0002 !A!N! !N! !20030320!20040927!004032132!004032132!017041232!N!W G YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION!ONE GULLY AVENUE !PHILADELPHIA !MS!39350!36000!049!28!JACKSON !HINDS… Key points: 1. Contract value of $156.2 million for construction services. 2. Competition involved 5 bidders, indicating a moderately competitive market. 3. Contract duration of 1986 days (over 5 years) suggests a long-term project. 4. Fixed-price contract type may limit cost overruns but could impact flexibility. 5. Awarded to W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company, a known entity in the sector. 6. Geographic focus on Mississippi for airfield infrastructure development.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $156.2 million for construction of airfield structures appears substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for military airfields would be necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. The fixed-price nature of the contract suggests a defined scope and budget, which can be beneficial for cost control. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for similar structures, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing is optimal.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with five bids received. The presence of multiple bidders suggests a healthy level of interest and capability within the market for this type of construction. A competition with five bidders generally allows for price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive pricing to secure the award.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process with multiple offers is generally favorable for taxpayers, as it tends to drive down prices and ensure the government receives a fair market value for the services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army and potentially other branches of the Department of Defense requiring modernized airfield infrastructure. The contract delivers essential construction services for 'Other Airfield Structures', likely including hangars, maintenance facilities, or support buildings. The geographic impact is concentrated in Mississippi, supporting local economic activity and employment during the construction phase. Workforce implications include job creation for construction laborers, engineers, project managers, and support staff in the Mississippi region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (over 5 years) could lead to scope creep or unforeseen cost increases if not managed meticulously.
Fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to compromises on quality if not adequately overseen, especially in complex construction projects.
Reliance on a single prime contractor for such a large project necessitates robust oversight to ensure performance and compliance.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
The contractor, W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company, has a track record in government contracting.
The contract specifies a fixed-price structure, which provides budget certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically related to infrastructure development for military aviation. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220, 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction,' encompasses projects like this. The market for large-scale military construction is often characterized by a mix of large prime contractors and specialized subcontractors, with significant government oversight. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other DoD contracts for airfield construction or similar large facility development projects.

Small Business Impact

While this contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not appear to have a specific small business set-aside, large prime contractors like W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company often engage small businesses as subcontractors. The extent of subcontracting to small businesses would be a key factor in assessing the impact on the small business ecosystem. Further analysis of subcontracting plans would be needed to determine the specific benefits to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army, likely through its contracting command and project management offices. Accountability measures would include performance reviews, milestone tracking, and adherence to contract terms. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific project details might be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction (MILCON)
Airfield Operations and Maintenance
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Infrastructure Development Contracts
Federal Construction Projects

Risk Flags

Long-term contract duration may increase risk of cost escalation or scope creep.
Fixed-price contract type requires careful management to ensure quality is not compromised.
Potential for reliance on a single prime contractor necessitates robust oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.6 million to W. G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. 200307!000369!2100!HA22 !USPFO FOR MISSISSIPPI !DAHA2203C0002 !A!N! !N! !20030320!20040927!004032132!004032132!017041232!N!W G YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION!ONE GULLY AVENUE !PHILADELPHIA !MS!39350!36000!049!28!JACKSON !HINDS !MISS !+000014276400!N!N!000000000000!Y129!OTHER AIRFIELD STRUCTURES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !236220!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is W. G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-03-20. End: 2008-08-26.

What is the track record of W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company with the Department of Defense?

W. G. Yates & Sons Construction Company has a history of securing contracts with the Department of Defense. While this specific contract is for a significant amount ($156.2 million), a comprehensive review of their past performance with the DoD would involve examining the number and value of previous awards, their on-time and on-budget completion rates, and any documented performance issues or commendations. Their experience with similar types of construction, particularly airfield-related projects, would also be a critical factor in assessing their capability to successfully execute this contract. Publicly available data from contract databases can provide insights into their historical engagement with federal agencies.

How does the $156.2 million contract value compare to similar airfield structure construction projects?

Benchmarking the $156.2 million contract value requires comparing it to similar projects in terms of scope, complexity, and location. Large-scale military airfield construction projects can vary significantly in cost based on factors like the type of structures being built (e.g., hangars, control towers, maintenance facilities), the specific requirements for materials and technology, and the geographic location's labor and material costs. Without access to a detailed breakdown of the project's specifications and a database of comparable, recently awarded contracts for similar airfield structures, a precise comparison is challenging. However, $156.2 million suggests a major construction undertaking, likely involving multiple structures and significant infrastructure work.

What are the primary risks associated with a fixed-price contract of this magnitude and duration?

A primary risk with a fixed-price contract of this magnitude ($156.2 million) and long duration (over 5 years) is the potential for cost overruns if the initial estimates do not accurately account for all project variables. While the fixed price offers budget certainty, unforeseen issues like material price escalations, labor shortages, or complex site conditions not fully identified during the bidding phase can strain the contractor's profit margin. This could incentivize the contractor to cut corners on quality or scope if not rigorously managed. Conversely, the government bears the risk if the scope of work expands significantly beyond what was initially defined, potentially requiring change orders that increase the overall cost. Robust project management and oversight are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the 'Other Airfield Structures' designation imply about the scope of work?

The designation 'Other Airfield Structures' is broad and implies that the contract covers a range of facilities necessary for airfield operations beyond the primary runways and taxiways. This could include, but is not limited to, aircraft hangars, maintenance and repair facilities, administrative buildings, storage depots, control towers, fire stations, or specialized support structures. The specific nature of these structures would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW). The variety of potential structures suggests a comprehensive approach to enhancing or modernizing the airfield's support capabilities, requiring diverse construction expertise.

How might the 5-bidder competition influence the final price and quality of the delivered structures?

A competition involving five bidders generally indicates a healthy market with sufficient interest and capability to undertake the project. This level of competition typically drives prices down as contractors vie for the award, potentially leading to a more favorable price for the government compared to a sole-source or limited-competition scenario. Furthermore, multiple bidders are incentivized to offer competitive terms and demonstrate their ability to deliver high-quality work to win the contract. However, the quality aspect also depends heavily on the government's specifications, inspection processes, and the contractor's commitment to meeting those standards throughout the project lifecycle. A moderate number of bidders strikes a balance between ensuring competition and avoiding an overly complex evaluation process.

What are the potential economic impacts in Mississippi resulting from this construction contract?

This $156.2 million construction contract is likely to have a significant positive economic impact on Mississippi. It will directly create numerous jobs in the construction sector, including skilled trades, project management, and administrative roles. Indirectly, it will stimulate local economies through increased demand for materials, equipment rentals, and services from local suppliers and businesses. The presence of a large federal contract can also boost the reputation of local contractors and potentially lead to further investment and development in the region. The duration of the contract, spanning over five years, suggests a sustained period of economic activity and employment.

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

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Yates Companies Inc

Address: ONE GULLY AVENUE, PHILADELPHIA, MS, 39350

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline