GSA's $164.5M Whipple Building MEP Replacement Contract Awarded to Ryan Companies Under Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $164,480,700 ($164.5M)

Contractor: Ryan Companies US Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2009-11-13

End Date: 2014-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,874 days

Daily Burn Rate: $87.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY PRE-DESIGN AND DESIGN STAGE CMC CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING REPLACEMENT PROJECT AT THE BH WHIPPLE FEDERAL BUILDING IN FT. SNELLING, MINNESOTA.

Place of Performance

Location: FORT SNELLING, HENNEPIN County, MINNESOTA, 55111

State: Minnesota Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $164.5 million to RYAN COMPANIES US INC for work described as: TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY PRE-DESIGN AND DESIGN STAGE CMC CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING REPLACEMENT PROJECT AT THE BH WHIPPLE FEDERAL BUILDING IN FT. SNELLING, MINNESOTA. Key points: 1. The contract, valued at $164.5 million, covers pre-design and design stages for mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems. 2. Awarded to Ryan Companies US Inc. via full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. The project aims to modernize infrastructure at the Fort Snelling Federal Building, potentially improving operational efficiency. 4. The duration of the contract was 1874 days, suggesting a complex, multi-year undertaking.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $164.5 million for a federal building MEP replacement is substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale federal construction projects is difficult without specific scope details, but the price appears within a reasonable range for a project of this magnitude and complexity.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. This method generally promotes competitive pricing and allows the government to select the best value offer.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is intended to ensure taxpayer funds are used efficiently by fostering a competitive environment that drives down costs.

Public Impact

Modernization of critical building systems at a federal facility. Potential for improved energy efficiency and reduced maintenance costs. Impact on federal operations and employee working conditions at the Whipple Federal Building. Job creation within the construction sector in Minnesota.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (1874 days) may indicate potential for cost overruns or delays.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess value for money.
No indication of small business participation.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process.
Project addresses essential infrastructure upgrades for a federal building.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector. Federal spending in this sector often involves large, complex projects requiring specialized expertise. Benchmarks for similar federal building renovations can vary widely based on size, location, and scope of work.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a factor in this contract award (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests the prime contractor is likely a large business, and there is no explicit information on subcontracting to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) is responsible for overseeing federal building construction and maintenance. Oversight would typically involve monitoring project progress, adherence to design specifications, and budget management to ensure accountability.

Related Government Programs

Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
General Services Administration Contracting
Public Buildings Service Programs

Risk Flags

Long contract duration.
No explicit small business participation.
Lack of detailed performance metrics.
Potential for scope creep in complex construction projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $164.5 million to RYAN COMPANIES US INC. TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY PRE-DESIGN AND DESIGN STAGE CMC CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING REPLACEMENT PROJECT AT THE BH WHIPPLE FEDERAL BUILDING IN FT. SNELLING, MINNESOTA.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RYAN COMPANIES US INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $164.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-11-13. End: 2014-12-31.

What specific performance metrics were established to measure the success and value delivered by this $164.5 million contract?

The provided data does not specify performance metrics. Typically, for construction contracts, metrics would include adherence to schedule, budget compliance, quality of work, and achievement of design specifications. Without these, assessing the true value for money and effectiveness of the Ryan Companies' services is challenging.

Given the 1874-day duration, what were the primary risk mitigation strategies employed to manage potential cost overruns and schedule delays?

The data does not detail specific risk mitigation strategies. However, for long-duration construction projects, common strategies include detailed project planning, phased execution, robust change order management processes, contingency planning, and regular progress reviews with the contractor to identify and address issues proactively.

How did the full and open competition process ensure the most cost-effective solution for the taxpayer, beyond just selecting the lowest bid?

Full and open competition aims for cost-effectiveness by encouraging multiple bids, which inherently drives down prices. Beyond the lowest bid, the selection process likely considered factors like technical approach, past performance, and management capability, ensuring the chosen solution offered the best overall value, balancing cost with quality and risk.

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: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 50 S 10TH ST STE 300, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55403

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $164,480,910

Exercised Options: $164,480,910

Current Obligation: $164,480,700

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline