GSA's $73.7M McCoy Federal Building Modernization Contract Awarded to Skanska USA Building Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $73,691,644 ($73.7M)

Contractor: Skanska USA Building Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2009-07-24

End Date: 2012-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,164 days

Daily Burn Rate: $63.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY ACT FUNDING. MODERNIZATION OF THE DR. A. H. MCCOY FEDERAL BUILDING CMC

Place of Performance

Location: JACKSON, HINDS County, MISSISSIPPI, 39269

State: Mississippi Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $73.7 million to SKANSKA USA BUILDING INC. for work described as: TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY ACT FUNDING. MODERNIZATION OF THE DR. A. H. MCCOY FEDERAL BUILDING CMC Key points: 1. Contract aimed to modernize the Dr. A.H. McCoy Federal Building, a significant public infrastructure project. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract was over three years, indicating a substantial scope of work. 4. The project falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 5. The award value represents a significant investment in federal building infrastructure. 6. The contract was a definitive contract, likely involving detailed specifications and deliverables.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific modernization contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and scope comparisons. However, the award value of $73.7 million for a federal building modernization over three years suggests a substantial project. The fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the contractor bore the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the scope was well-defined. Further analysis would require comparing the cost per square foot or per major system upgraded against similar federal building modernization projects.

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 a bid. The presence of 10 bidders (no: 11) suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive down prices and encourage efficiency, as contractors vie to win the award by offering the best value proposition.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies that will occupy the modernized Dr. A.H. McCoy Federal Building, benefiting from improved facilities and potentially enhanced operational efficiency. The project delivered modernization services for a significant federal building, ensuring its continued utility and compliance with modern standards. The geographic impact is localized to the area where the Dr. A.H. McCoy Federal Building is situated, likely in Mississippi given the 'MS' state code. The construction activities would have supported jobs in the construction sector, including skilled trades and project management, within the local and regional economy.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in large-scale construction projects, which could impact final costs if not managed tightly.
Ensuring adherence to historical preservation requirements if the building has significant historical value.
Managing the logistics of construction around ongoing federal operations within or near the building.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive pricing environment.
Firm fixed-price contract structure shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The project addresses the modernization of critical federal infrastructure, ensuring long-term usability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The federal government is a major client for construction services, undertaking projects ranging from new builds to extensive renovations and modernizations of its vast real estate portfolio. Spending in this area is influenced by infrastructure needs, agency space requirements, and the lifecycle of federal facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the average cost of similar federal building modernization projects, considering factors like building size, age, and the complexity of upgrades.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and there is no explicit mention of small business subcontracting goals. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business, Skanska USA Building Inc. While large federal construction contracts often involve subcontracting opportunities, the absence of specific set-aside provisions means that small businesses would have had to compete for these subcontracts. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the extent to which Skanska engaged small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. Mechanisms likely included regular progress reports, site inspections, and contract performance reviews. Accountability measures would be tied to the firm fixed-price contract terms, with penalties or remedies for non-performance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, though detailed project-specific oversight documentation may not be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Modernization Programs
Public Infrastructure Investment
General Services Administration Construction Contracts
Recovery Act Funding Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope was not fully defined.
Risk of construction delays impacting federal agency operations.
Ensuring compliance with all federal building codes and environmental regulations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $73.7 million to SKANSKA USA BUILDING INC.. TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY ACT FUNDING. MODERNIZATION OF THE DR. A. H. MCCOY FEDERAL BUILDING CMC

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SKANSKA USA BUILDING INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $73.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-24. End: 2012-09-30.

What was the specific scope of modernization for the Dr. A.H. McCoy Federal Building?

The provided data does not detail the specific modernization scope. However, federal building modernization projects typically encompass a range of upgrades, including HVAC system replacements, electrical and plumbing upgrades, structural repairs, energy efficiency improvements (e.g., window replacement, insulation), interior renovations (e.g., office layouts, finishes), accessibility enhancements (ADA compliance), and potentially IT infrastructure upgrades. The 'Modernization of the Dr. A.H. McCoy Federal Building' designation suggests a comprehensive effort to update the facility to meet current operational, safety, and environmental standards, ensuring its long-term viability and functionality for federal agency use.

How does the $73.7 million award compare to other federal building modernization projects of similar scale?

Direct comparison is difficult without knowing the building's square footage, age, specific systems modernized, and geographic location's cost of living/labor. However, $73.7 million over approximately three years for a significant federal building modernization is substantial. For context, large-scale federal building renovations can range from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars. Factors like the complexity of the work (e.g., historical preservation, seismic retrofitting, extensive system overhauls) heavily influence cost. The firm fixed-price nature suggests a well-defined scope was established upfront to manage this significant investment.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate Skanska USA Building Inc.'s performance?

Specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data. However, for a construction contract of this nature, typical KPIs would include adherence to the project schedule (on-time completion of milestones and final delivery), quality of workmanship (meeting specified standards and minimizing defects), budget adherence (staying within the firm fixed-price contract amount), safety compliance (maintaining a safe work environment and minimizing incidents), and overall client satisfaction. The GSA's Public Buildings Service would have monitored these aspects throughout the contract duration.

What is the significance of the contract being a 'Definitive Contract' awarded in 2009?

A 'Definitive Contract' is a standard contract type used for large, complex procurements where the scope, price, and terms are clearly defined. Awarded in 2009, this contract likely falls under the umbrella of federal stimulus efforts related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, as indicated by 'TAS RECOVERY ACT FUNDING.' Such contracts aimed to stimulate economic activity through infrastructure improvements. The definitive nature implies a commitment to a specific project with detailed specifications, unlike more flexible agreements.

Were there any notable risks identified during the bidding or execution phases of this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly list identified risks. However, common risks in large federal construction projects include unforeseen site conditions (e.g., hazardous materials, unexpected structural issues), delays in material procurement or delivery, labor shortages, changes in regulatory requirements, and potential disputes over scope interpretation. The firm fixed-price contract shifts the financial risk of cost overruns due to these issues primarily to the contractor, Skanska USA Building Inc., provided the scope was accurately defined and managed.

How did the 'Recovery Act Funding' influence the contract's terms or urgency?

The 'TAS RECOVERY ACT FUNDING' designation strongly suggests this contract was financed, at least in part, by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). ARRA funding often came with requirements for accelerated timelines to stimulate the economy quickly, increased transparency and reporting obligations, and sometimes specific goals related to job creation. While the contract itself is a standard definitive contract, the funding source likely imposed additional oversight and reporting demands on both the GSA and Skanska to ensure timely and effective use of stimulus funds.

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

Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Skanska AB

Address: 55 IVAN ALLEN JR BLVD NW STE 600, ATLANTA, GA, 30308

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $73,691,644

Exercised Options: $73,691,644

Current Obligation: $73,691,644

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline