DOJ's $137M construction contract for Federal Prison System awarded to Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $136,941,696 ($136.9M)

Contractor: Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2007-09-25

End Date: 2011-03-26

Contract Duration: 1,278 days

Daily Burn Rate: $107.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 151003 - CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

Place of Performance

Location: MENDOTA, FRESNO County, CALIFORNIA, 93640

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $136.9 million to LEWIS C. NELSON AND SONS, INC. for work described as: 151003 - CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in federal correctional infrastructure. 2. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract (over 3 years) indicates a substantial project scope. 4. Fixed-price contract type suggests cost certainty for the government. 5. The award was made by the Department of Justice, Federal Prison System. 6. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 7. The contract was awarded in 2007 and completed in 2011.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific construction contract is challenging without detailed project specifications and market conditions from 2007-2011. However, a $137 million contract for federal prison construction indicates a large-scale project. The fixed-price nature of the contract generally provides cost control for the government, but the final value can be influenced by change orders. Comparing this to similar federal correctional facility construction projects would provide a clearer picture of value for money.

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 bids. The presence of 2 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While two bidders participated, a higher number of bids would typically lead to more robust price discovery and potentially lower prices for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it aims to secure the best possible price through a wide range of offers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Federal Prison System and the Department of Justice, receiving upgraded or new correctional facilities. The services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction, likely for prison infrastructure. The geographic impact is centered in California, where the contract was performed. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers and related trades during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if fixed-price contract did not adequately account for all project complexities.
Risk of delays in construction impacting facility readiness.
Ensuring quality of construction meets federal standards for correctional facilities.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, maximizing potential for competitive pricing.
Fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract duration of over 3 years allowed for substantial project completion.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The federal government is a significant consumer of construction services for infrastructure projects, including correctional facilities. The market for federal construction is competitive, with many firms vying for large-scale projects. Benchmarking against other large federal building projects would be necessary for a precise comparison.

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 or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc., would be responsible for managing the entire project scope.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for federal construction contracts typically involves project managers from the contracting agency (in this case, the Federal Prison System/Bureau of Prisons) to monitor progress, quality, and adherence to specifications. Accountability is established through the contract terms, including performance milestones and payment schedules. Transparency is often facilitated through contract award databases and public reporting, though detailed project-level oversight information may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Prison System Construction Projects
Department of Justice Facilities Management
Bureau of Prisons Capital Expenditures
Commercial Building Construction Contracts
Institutional Building Construction

Risk Flags

Contract Duration
Number of Bids Received
Fixed-Price Contract Risk

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $136.9 million to LEWIS C. NELSON AND SONS, INC.. 151003 - CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LEWIS C. NELSON AND SONS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $136.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-25. End: 2011-03-26.

What was the specific nature of the construction services provided under this contract?

The contract, NAICS code 236220, falls under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. Given the awarding agency is the Federal Prison System/Bureau of Prisons, the services likely involved the construction, renovation, or expansion of federal correctional facilities. This could include new cell blocks, administrative buildings, support facilities, or infrastructure upgrades within existing prison complexes. The exact scope would be detailed in the contract's statement of work, which is not provided in this summary data.

How does the $137 million contract value compare to other federal prison construction projects?

Without access to a comprehensive database of historical federal prison construction projects with detailed cost breakdowns and project scopes, a direct comparison is difficult. However, $137 million represents a substantial investment, suggesting a large-scale project such as building a new facility, a major expansion, or a significant renovation. Federal prison construction costs can vary widely based on location, security requirements, size, and complexity. This figure is likely within the upper range for individual project awards but not necessarily extraordinary for a major federal correctional infrastructure undertaking.

What were the key performance indicators or milestones for this contract?

Specific performance indicators and milestones are not detailed in the provided data. However, for a construction contract of this magnitude and duration (1278 days), typical performance metrics would include adherence to construction schedules, quality of workmanship, compliance with building codes and federal standards, safety record, and timely completion of defined project phases. The fixed-price nature of the contract implies that meeting these milestones within the agreed-upon price would be a primary performance objective.

What is the track record of Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc. with federal contracts?

The provided data indicates Lewis C. Nelson and Sons, Inc. was awarded this $137 million contract by the Department of Justice. To assess their broader track record, one would need to examine other federal contract awards to this company, including their performance history, any past disputes or terminations, and their experience with similar types of projects (e.g., large-scale institutional construction). This single data point suggests they have secured significant federal work, but a full assessment requires a broader review of their federal contracting history.

Were there any significant risks identified or mitigation strategies employed for this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly list identified risks or mitigation strategies. However, for a large federal construction project, common risks include unforeseen site conditions, material cost fluctuations (though mitigated by fixed-price), labor availability, weather delays, and scope creep. Mitigation strategies would typically involve thorough pre-construction planning, contingency budgeting, robust project management, clear communication protocols, and potentially performance bonds. The fixed-price contract itself is a risk management tool to cap the government's financial exposure.

How did the two bids received compare in terms of price and technical approach?

The provided data only states that two bids were received. It does not offer details on the specific pricing or technical proposals submitted by each bidder. In a full and open competition, the contracting agency would evaluate all submitted bids based on pre-defined criteria (often a combination of price and non-price factors like technical capability, past performance, and small business utilization). The contract would then be awarded to the responsible bidder offering the best value to the government, which could be the lowest price or a balance of factors.

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

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3400 MC CALL STE 100, SELMA, CA, 21

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $136,941,696

Exercised Options: $136,941,696

Current Obligation: $136,941,696

Timeline