GSA awards $26.2M contract for St. Louis building construction and design services to HOF Construction Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,238,815 ($26.2M)

Contractor: HOF Construction Inc

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2009-07-28

End Date: 2013-07-29

Contract Duration: 1,462 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.9K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: RECOVERY TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY: THE WORK TO BE DELIVERED UNDER THIS CONTRACT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: (1) PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES INCLUDING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FOR THE RAY ENVELOPE PROJECT LOCATED AT 1222 SPRUCE ST., ST. LOUIS, MO. ALSO, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AT 1222 SPRUCE ST., ST. LOUIS, MO.

Place of Performance

Location: SAINT LOUIS, SAINT LOUIS CITY County, MISSOURI, 63103

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $26.2 million to HOF CONSTRUCTION INC for work described as: RECOVERY TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY: THE WORK TO BE DELIVERED UNDER THIS CONTRACT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: (1) PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES INCLUDING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FOR THE RAY ENVELOPE PROJECT LOCATED AT 1222 SPRUCE ST., ST. LOUIS, MO. ALSO, CONSTRUCTION SERV… Key points: 1. Contract awarded through a competitive delivery order process, suggesting a degree of market vetting. 2. The contract covers both pre-construction design and construction services, indicating a comprehensive scope. 3. Project located in St. Louis, Missouri, with potential implications for local employment and businesses. 4. The duration of the contract is over 4 years, allowing for phased execution of services. 5. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but requires careful scope management. 6. No specific small business set-aside noted, raising questions about broader economic inclusion.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $26.2 million for a multi-year construction and design project in St. Louis appears within a reasonable range for similar federal building projects. However, without specific details on the scope of work, square footage, or complexity of the Ray Envelope Project, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against comparable GSA projects of similar scale and complexity would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation of pricing and value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded as a 'Competitive Delivery Order,' indicating it was likely competed under a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract or a similar broad solicitation. The presence of 5 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition, which generally benefits price discovery and can lead to more favorable terms for the government. The specific details of the bidding process and the number of proposals received would provide further insight into the intensity of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by fostering a market-driven price. The competition among bidders likely resulted in a more cost-effective solution than a sole-source award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the General Services Administration (GSA) and federal agencies requiring facilities in St. Louis. Services delivered include architectural design development and construction for the Ray Envelope Project. The geographic impact is concentrated in St. Louis, Missouri, potentially stimulating the local construction economy. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, designers, engineers, and project managers in the St. Louis area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in complex construction and design projects, which could lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.
Dependence on a single contractor, HOF Construction Inc., for critical design and construction phases requires robust oversight.
The fixed-price nature of the contract could incentivize cost-cutting that might impact quality if not carefully monitored.

Positive Signals

Competitive award process suggests a baseline level of market validation for the chosen contractor and pricing.
The contract covers both design and construction, potentially streamlining project delivery and reducing coordination issues.
The fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, assuming the scope is well-defined and managed.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the federal contracting market. The General Services Administration (GSA) is a major procurer of such services, responsible for managing and maintaining federal buildings. Spending in this sector is influenced by infrastructure needs, agency growth, and the lifecycle of existing federal facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other GSA construction projects of similar size and scope across different geographic regions.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that opportunities for small business participation may be limited unless HOF Construction Inc. voluntarily includes them as subcontractors. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem and whether they are being leveraged for specialized services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the purview of the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically its Public Buildings Service. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports and Inspector General audits would provide deeper insights into performance and adherence to requirements.

Related Government Programs

GSA Federal Building Construction
Public Buildings Service Projects
Commercial and Institutional Building Construction Contracts
Design-Build Federal Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if design scope is not fully defined or changes occur.
Risk of quality compromise if contractor faces cost pressures under fixed-price contract.
Limited visibility into small business subcontracting opportunities.
Contract duration extends over multiple years, requiring sustained oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $26.2 million to HOF CONSTRUCTION INC. RECOVERY TAS::47 4543::TAS RECOVERY: THE WORK TO BE DELIVERED UNDER THIS CONTRACT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO: (1) PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES INCLUDING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FOR THE RAY ENVELOPE PROJECT LOCATED AT 1222 SPRUCE ST., ST. LOUIS, MO. ALSO, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AT 1222 SPRUCE ST., ST. LOUIS, MO.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HOF CONSTRUCTION INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-28. End: 2013-07-29.

What is the specific nature and scope of the 'Ray Envelope Project' and how does it compare to typical GSA building projects?

The 'Ray Envelope Project' involves pre-construction phase services including design development, followed by construction services, both located at 1222 Spruce St., St. Louis, MO. While the exact technical specifications and architectural goals of the 'Ray Envelope' are not detailed in the provided data, GSA projects typically involve renovation, modernization, or new construction of federal facilities. These can range from office buildings and courthouses to specialized research or operational centers. The scope often includes structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, as well as interior finishes and site work. Comparing this project's scope to typical GSA projects would require access to detailed project documentation, such as architectural drawings, performance work statements, and project initiation justifications. Factors like building size (square footage), age of the facility, specific functional requirements, and sustainability goals would be key comparison points.

How does the $26.2 million award amount compare to the average cost of similar federal building construction projects managed by GSA?

The $26.2 million award for the Ray Envelope Project needs to be benchmarked against similar GSA construction projects to assess its value. Average costs for federal building construction can vary significantly based on location, project type (new build vs. renovation), size, complexity, and market conditions. For instance, a mid-sized renovation of an existing federal office building might cost significantly less per square foot than the construction of a new, highly specialized facility. To provide a meaningful comparison, one would need to analyze GSA's historical contract data for projects awarded within the last 2-3 years that share similar characteristics: firm-fixed-price, competitive delivery orders, located in major metropolitan areas, and involving both design and construction. Without this granular data, stating whether $26.2 million is high, low, or average is speculative. However, for a project encompassing both design and construction over several years, this figure is not inherently unreasonable for a federal facility.

What were the key factors that led to HOF Construction Inc. being selected for this contract, given the competitive nature?

Since the contract was awarded via a 'Competitive Delivery Order' with 5 bidders, HOF Construction Inc. was selected based on factors outlined in the solicitation's evaluation criteria. Typically, federal procurements balance price and non-price factors. While the data specifies a 'FIRM FIXED PRICE' contract type, suggesting price is a significant consideration, other elements likely played a role. These could include the offeror's technical approach, past performance on similar projects, relevant experience, management capability, and understanding of the project requirements. The GSA likely evaluated proposals to determine the 'best value' to the government, which may not always be the lowest price. HOF Construction Inc. likely demonstrated a superior combination of technical merit, relevant experience, and a competitive price compared to the other four bidders, meeting or exceeding the government's requirements as defined in the Request for Proposal (RFP).

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a project involving both design and construction?

Firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts are generally preferred by the government for cost certainty. However, for projects involving both design and construction, FFP contracts carry specific risks. A primary risk is that the contractor, HOF Construction Inc., might face unforeseen challenges during the design or construction phases that increase their costs beyond initial estimates. If the scope is not perfectly defined upfront or if design changes are required, the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which could incentivize them to cut corners on quality or materials to protect their profit margin. Conversely, if the contractor significantly underestimates costs or risks, they might become insolvent or unable to complete the project. For the government, the risk lies in potentially paying a premium for this cost certainty, as contractors often build contingency into their FFP bids. Effective management, clear scope definition, and robust change order processes are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How has GSA's spending on commercial and institutional building construction in Missouri trended over the past five years?

Analyzing GSA's spending trends on commercial and institutional building construction in Missouri over the past five years would require access to historical GSA contract databases and filtering by state, sector, and agency. The provided data for this specific contract (awarded in 2009) is a single data point and does not reflect broader trends. Generally, GSA spending fluctuates based on federal infrastructure needs, budget appropriations, and the condition of the existing federal building portfolio. Periods of increased infrastructure investment or major agency relocations/consolidations can drive up spending. Conversely, budget constraints or a focus on maintaining existing facilities rather than new construction could lead to lower spending. To determine the trend, one would need to aggregate data on all similar contracts awarded by GSA in Missouri over the specified period, calculate annual spending, and identify patterns or significant shifts.

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: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3137 JAMIESON AVE, SAINT LOUIS, MO, 63139

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,238,815

Exercised Options: $26,238,815

Current Obligation: $26,238,815

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS06P07GYD0019

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline