GSA's $43.5M Construction Manager Contract for FBCT Modernization Awarded to Hoar-Christman, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $43,534,488 ($43.5M)

Contractor: Hoar-Christman, LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2009-07-23

End Date: 2013-11-15

Contract Duration: 1,576 days

Daily Burn Rate: $27.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (APPLIES TO AWARDS WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE ABOVE APPLY)

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TAS::47 4543::TAS. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS CONSTRUCTOR FOR MODERNIZATION OF ROBERT SMITH VANCE FBCT

Place of Performance

Location: BIRMINGHAM, JEFFERSON County, ALABAMA, 35209

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $43.5 million to HOAR-CHRISTMAN, LLC for work described as: TAS::47 4543::TAS. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS CONSTRUCTOR FOR MODERNIZATION OF ROBERT SMITH VANCE FBCT Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of over 4 years indicates a significant, long-term project. 3. The award to a single entity, Hoar-Christman, LLC, warrants examination of performance and pricing. 4. The project falls under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, a key sector for federal infrastructure. 5. Geographic location in Alabama (AL) may have implications for local workforce and economic impact. 6. The absence of small business set-aside or subcontracting flags requires further investigation into small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $43.5 million contract requires detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar construction management projects. Without specific performance metrics or a breakdown of costs against a baseline, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. The duration of the contract suggests a substantial project, and the final cost should be evaluated against the scope of work completed and any potential cost overruns or savings.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 9 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the General Services Administration (GSA) and the federal government, receiving modernized facilities. The project delivers construction management services for the modernization of the Robert Smith Vance Federal Building and Courthouse. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alabama (AL), potentially creating local jobs and economic activity. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, project managers, and support staff in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals or reporting could limit opportunities for small businesses.
The long contract duration may present risks related to scope creep or unforeseen cost increases if not managed tightly.
Performance data beyond the award itself is not readily available, making it hard to assess contractor effectiveness.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
The contract was awarded to a single entity, Hoar-Christman, LLC, which can sometimes lead to streamlined execution.
The project addresses the modernization of a federal building, contributing to the upkeep of government infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry. Federal spending in this area supports the maintenance and upgrade of government facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale federal building modernization projects managed by GSA or other agencies, considering factors like project complexity, location, and duration.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business set-asides were not utilized (ss: false, sb: false). This means the competition was open to all businesses, regardless of size. Without specific subcontracting plans or goals mentioned, it's unclear what level of participation small businesses had in this contract. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities were pursued or if the prime contractor engaged with the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, performance reviews, and payment schedules. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed project-specific oversight reports are not always publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Modernization Projects
GSA Construction Contracts
Commercial Building Construction Services
Public Infrastructure Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to long contract duration.
Limited visibility into small business participation.
Performance data not readily available for assessment.
Scope creep risk in long-term modernization projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $43.5 million to HOAR-CHRISTMAN, LLC. TAS::47 4543::TAS. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS CONSTRUCTOR FOR MODERNIZATION OF ROBERT SMITH VANCE FBCT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HOAR-CHRISTMAN, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $43.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-23. End: 2013-11-15.

What was the specific scope of work for the modernization of the Robert Smith Vance FBCT?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of work for the modernization of the Robert Smith Vance Federal Building and Courthouse (FBCT). However, as a 'Construction Manager as Constructor' contract, it typically involves overseeing and executing the physical construction and renovation activities. This could include structural repairs, system upgrades (HVAC, electrical, plumbing), interior renovations, facade improvements, and ensuring compliance with building codes and accessibility standards. The full scope would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), which is not included in the provided data.

How does the $43.5 million cost compare to similar federal building modernization projects?

Comparing the $43.5 million cost requires access to a database of similar federal building modernization projects, including their scope, size, location, and duration. Without such comparative data, it's challenging to benchmark this specific contract's value. Factors influencing cost include the age and condition of the building, the extent of renovations required, prevailing labor and material costs in Alabama, and the specific services provided by the construction manager. A comprehensive analysis would involve identifying comparable projects and adjusting for these variables to assess if the cost is reasonable.

What is the track record of Hoar-Christman, LLC in managing federal construction projects of this scale?

The provided data identifies Hoar-Christman, LLC as the contractor but does not offer details on their track record with federal projects. To assess their experience, one would need to research their past performance on similar contracts, including project size, complexity, timeliness, and adherence to budget. Government contract databases and past performance reviews (if publicly available) would be crucial resources. A strong track record with federal agencies, particularly GSA, would indicate a lower performance risk for this contract.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how was performance measured?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or the performance measurement methods for this contract. Typically, construction management contracts include metrics related to schedule adherence, cost control, quality of work, safety compliance, and stakeholder satisfaction. The GSA would have established these KPIs and a system for monitoring Hoar-Christman, LLC's performance throughout the contract duration. Regular progress reports, site inspections, and formal reviews would likely have been part of the performance assessment process.

What is the historical spending pattern for construction management services by the GSA's Public Buildings Service?

The provided data focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending patterns for GSA's Public Buildings Service (PBS) in construction management. To analyze historical spending, one would need access to GSA's procurement data over several fiscal years. This would involve aggregating spending on similar contract types (e.g., CM@Risk, Construction Manager as Constructor) and comparing it to overall PBS budgets and construction expenditures. Such an analysis could reveal trends in contract awards, average contract values, and the prevalence of different competition levels.

Were there any significant challenges or disputes during the execution of this contract?

The provided data does not contain information regarding challenges or disputes encountered during the execution of this contract. Contract performance issues, change orders, or disputes are typically documented in contract administration records, which are not included here. A thorough review of contract modification history, payment disputes, or any formal claims filed by or against Hoar-Christman, LLC would be necessary to identify any significant challenges.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: COMBINATION (APPLIES TO AWARDS WHERE TWO OR MORE OF THE ABOVE APPLY) (2)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2 METROPLEX DR STE 400, BIRMINGHAM, AL, 35209

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $43,534,488

Exercised Options: $43,534,488

Current Obligation: $43,534,488

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline