GSA's $213M EEOB Modernization Phase III contract awarded to Grunley Construction for building construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $212,934,326 ($212.9M)

Contractor: Grunley Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2008-07-18

End Date: 2014-03-28

Contract Duration: 2,079 days

Daily Burn Rate: $102.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: EEOB MODERNIZATION, PHASE III

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20407

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $212.9 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: EEOB MODERNIZATION, PHASE III Key points: 1. Contract value of $213 million for a large-scale modernization project. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type indicates defined cost expectations. 4. Project duration of approximately 5.7 years, typical for major construction. 5. Geographic focus on Washington D.C. for federal building infrastructure. 6. No small business set-aside, potentially limiting direct small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $213 million for the EEOB Modernization Phase III appears substantial, reflecting the scale of a major federal building renovation. Benchmarking against similar large-scale federal construction projects would be necessary to definitively assess value for money. The firm fixed-price nature provides cost certainty, but the final cost-effectiveness depends on the execution and any change orders. Without specific performance metrics or comparisons to industry standards for similar modernization efforts, a precise value assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The number of bidders is not specified, but this procurement method generally fosters competitive pricing and encourages contractors to offer their best terms. The open competition suggests that the General Services Administration sought to maximize value and ensure a fair market price by allowing a wide range of qualified construction firms to participate.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it is designed to drive down costs through market forces and ensure that the government receives competitive pricing for services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies housed within the EEOB, who will gain modernized facilities. The project delivers essential infrastructure upgrades and modernization services for a significant federal building. The geographic impact is concentrated in the District of Columbia, supporting federal operations in the capital. The contract supports the construction workforce, including skilled trades and project management personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during a multi-year construction project.
Dependence on a single prime contractor for a large, complex project introduces execution risk.
Long project duration increases the risk of scope creep or changes in federal requirements.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process likely resulted in a fair price.
Award to an established construction company (Grunley Construction) may indicate a lower risk of performance issues.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the commercial and institutional building construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal building modernization projects like this are crucial for maintaining government infrastructure. Spending in this sector is influenced by federal budget allocations, infrastructure needs, and economic conditions. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale federal building renovation contracts managed by GSA or other agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the data indicates no explicit small business participation. This means that large businesses were the primary focus of the competition. While the prime contractor may utilize small businesses for subcontracting, there is no direct set-aside requirement. The impact on the small business ecosystem is therefore indirect, relying on the prime's subcontracting decisions rather than a mandated allocation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services within the agreed budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and public reporting, though specific oversight activities and Inspector General involvement would depend on project milestones and any reported issues.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Modernization Programs
GSA Capital Investments
Public Buildings Service Contracts
Large-Scale Construction Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to project complexity and duration.
Risk of contractor performance issues on a large-scale project.
Dependency on stable federal funding over multiple fiscal years.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $212.9 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. EEOB MODERNIZATION, PHASE III

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $212.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-07-18. End: 2014-03-28.

What is Grunley Construction's track record with large federal building modernization contracts?

Grunley Construction Co., Inc. has a significant history of undertaking large-scale construction and renovation projects, including many for federal agencies and in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Their portfolio often includes complex projects involving historic buildings, secure facilities, and extensive infrastructure upgrades. While specific performance details for every contract are not publicly available, their sustained presence and repeated awards from agencies like GSA suggest a generally positive track record in managing complex federal construction. A deeper dive into past performance reviews and any documented disputes or successes on similar projects would provide a more granular understanding of their capabilities and reliability for a contract of this magnitude.

How does the $213 million contract value compare to similar federal building modernization projects?

The $213 million value for the EEOB Modernization Phase III places it among significant federal construction and renovation projects. Large-scale federal building modernizations, especially those involving historic structures or extensive system upgrades (HVAC, electrical, security), can easily reach into the hundreds of millions of dollars. For context, major agency headquarters renovations or new construction projects often exceed this amount. Without specific details on the scope of work (e.g., square footage, specific systems being replaced, historical preservation requirements), a direct comparison is difficult. However, GSA manages numerous projects in this general cost range, indicating that $213 million is within the expected spectrum for a comprehensive modernization of a substantial federal facility.

What are the primary risks associated with a multi-year, firm-fixed-price construction contract of this scale?

The primary risks for a multi-year, firm-fixed-price contract of this scale include unforeseen site conditions (e.g., hazardous materials, structural issues not identified in initial surveys), potential for significant scope creep if federal requirements change substantially mid-project, and contractor performance issues. For the government, the risk is that the fixed price might become unfavorable if market prices for materials or labor increase dramatically beyond projections, or if the contractor underbids and struggles to complete the work to standard. For the contractor, the risk is absorbing cost overruns if their initial estimates were inaccurate or if unforeseen challenges arise, potentially impacting quality or leading to disputes. Effective project management, contingency planning, and clear communication channels are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How effective are firm-fixed-price contracts in controlling costs for large federal construction projects?

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally considered effective tools for controlling costs on large federal construction projects, provided the scope of work is well-defined and stable. The FFP structure shifts the majority of the cost risk to the contractor, incentivizing them to manage resources efficiently and accurately estimate project expenses. This provides the government with a high degree of cost certainty. However, the effectiveness can be diminished if the initial scope is poorly defined, leading to numerous change orders that can increase the overall cost and administrative burden. For complex projects with inherent uncertainties, other contract types might offer better risk-sharing, but FFP remains a preferred method when predictability is paramount and the scope is clear.

What is the historical spending pattern for EEOB modernization or similar GSA building projects?

Historical spending patterns for EEOB modernization and similar GSA building projects reveal a consistent need for significant capital investment in federal infrastructure. GSA's budget often includes substantial allocations for major renovations, repairs, and modernizations across its vast portfolio of buildings. Projects like the EEOB modernization are typically multi-year endeavors, with funding often spread across several fiscal years. Analyzing past GSA modernization contracts shows values ranging from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the building's size, age, and the complexity of the required upgrades. Spending can fluctuate based on congressional appropriations, infrastructure priorities, and the condition of aging federal facilities.

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

Solicitation ID: GS-11P-08-MK-C-0031

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 15020 SHADY GROVE RD STE 500, ROCKVILLE, MD, 08

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $212,934,326

Exercised Options: $212,934,326

Current Obligation: $212,934,326

Timeline