FEMA awarded $26.3M for disaster housing construction support, with CH2M HILL CONSTRUCTORS, INC. managing up to 2000 unit installations

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,333,493 ($26.3M)

Contractor: CH2M Hill Constructors, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2005-10-11

End Date: 2011-09-24

Contract Duration: 2,174 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT FOR MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FEMA DIRECT HOUSING OPERATIONS (DHOPS) AND OTHER RECOVERY ACTIVITIES FOR ADDRESSING THE DISASTER RELATED NEEDS OF APPROXIMATELY 320,000 INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES, AND HOUSEHOLDS. INCLUDES PERFORMING SITE ASSESSMENTS AND INSPECTIONS, UP TO 2000 UNIT INSTALLATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORTING COORDINATION EFFORTS AND PLANNING WITH THE STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS FOR PROVIDING HOUSING (SHORT AND LONG TERM) FOR DISPLACED INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES, AND HOUSEHOLDS. ANY SINGLE SITE EXCEEDING 200 UNITS MUST BE APPROVED BY DAVID GARRATT, ACTING RECOVERY DIVISION DIRECTOR. HOUSING UNITS AND TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND STRUCTURES WILL REQUIRE APPROXIMATELY 18 MONTHS OF MAINTENANCE SUPPORT AND MANAGEMENT. INCLUDES ASSESSMENTS, IDENTIFICATION, DESIGN, AND DEVELOPMENT OF VARIOUS TYPES OF GROUP SITES AND ALTERNATIVE HOUSING SOLUTIONS.

Place of Performance

Location: ENGLEWOOD, DENVER County, COLORADO, 80112

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $26.3 million to CH2M HILL CONSTRUCTORS, INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCTION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT FOR MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FEMA DIRECT HOUSING OPERATIONS (DHOPS) AND OTHER RECOVERY ACTIVITIES FOR ADDRESSING THE DISASTER RELATED NEEDS OF APPROXIMATELY 320,000 INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES, AND HOUSEHOLDS… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical post-disaster housing solutions for a large affected population. 2. Significant duration of 2174 days indicates long-term recovery needs. 3. The contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) may allow for cost overruns. 4. Sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market competition. 5. The scope includes site assessments, installations, maintenance, and coordination with state/local officials. 6. Oversight is required for large-scale unit installations exceeding 200 units at a single site.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $26.3 million over approximately six years for disaster housing support appears substantial, but a direct comparison is difficult without more context on the scale and complexity of the recovery efforts. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while common for complex or uncertain projects, can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale disaster recovery construction support contracts would be necessary for a more definitive value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities or when urgency dictates a rapid award. The lack of competition means that pricing and service levels were not tested against the broader market, potentially leading to less favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding, as the government did not benefit from price discovery through a competitive process.

Public Impact

Displaced individuals, families, and households affected by disasters benefit from the provision of temporary and long-term housing solutions. Services include critical infrastructure support such as site assessments, unit installations, and ongoing maintenance. The contract supports recovery efforts in Colorado, with potential for broader geographic impact depending on disaster scope. The project implies a need for a significant construction and maintenance workforce, potentially creating employment opportunities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially impacting cost-effectiveness.
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost escalation if not rigorously managed.
The extensive duration and scope suggest a complex project with potential for unforeseen challenges and cost increases.

Positive Signals

Addresses critical post-disaster housing needs for a large population.
Includes comprehensive support from initial assessment to long-term maintenance.
Requires coordination with state and local entities, fostering intergovernmental collaboration.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically focusing on commercial and institutional building construction. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) often engages construction and technical support services for disaster recovery operations. The market for such services is typically characterized by a mix of large engineering and construction firms capable of handling large-scale, complex projects, especially those with urgent timelines and significant logistical requirements.

Small Business Impact

The contract details do not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a large prime contractor, the direct impact on small businesses is likely limited unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages them for subcontracting. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Given the sole-source nature and the critical function of disaster housing, robust oversight mechanisms are essential to ensure cost control, quality of work, and timely delivery. The requirement for specific approval for large unit installations suggests a level of management oversight is in place. Transparency would depend on FEMA's reporting practices for sole-source contracts and disaster recovery operations.

Related Government Programs

FEMA Disaster Relief Fund
Public Assistance Program
Housing Assistance Programs
Emergency Management and Response

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
Potential for cost overruns
Lack of competitive benchmarking

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $26.3 million to CH2M HILL CONSTRUCTORS, INC.. CONSTRUCTION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT FOR MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FEMA DIRECT HOUSING OPERATIONS (DHOPS) AND OTHER RECOVERY ACTIVITIES FOR ADDRESSING THE DISASTER RELATED NEEDS OF APPROXIMATELY 320,000 INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES, AND HOUSEHOLDS. INCLUDES PERFORMING SITE ASSESSMENTS AND INSPECTIONS, UP TO 2000 UNIT INSTALLATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORTING COORDINATION EFFORTS AND PLANNING WITH THE STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS FOR PROVIDING HOUSING (SHORT AND

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CH2M HILL CONSTRUCTORS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-10-11. End: 2011-09-24.

What is the track record of CH2M HILL CONSTRUCTORS, INC. with FEMA or similar disaster recovery contracts?

CH2M HILL CONSTRUCTORS, INC. (now part of Jacobs) has a significant history of performing large-scale engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) projects, including those related to infrastructure and disaster recovery. Their experience often involves complex logistical challenges and extensive government contracts. While specific details on their past FEMA disaster housing projects would require deeper research into contract databases and agency reports, their general profile suggests they are a capable entity for such work. However, the performance on this specific contract, especially given its sole-source nature and duration, would be a key indicator of their effectiveness in this context. Assessing past performance reviews, any documented issues, or successful outcomes on similar contracts would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and efficiency.

How does the $26.3 million cost compare to similar disaster housing support contracts?

Directly comparing the $26.3 million cost is challenging without detailed specifications of the services provided and the scale of the disaster. FEMA's housing support costs can vary dramatically based on the number of units, duration of support, type of housing (temporary vs. long-term), and geographic complexity. For instance, a contract focused solely on temporary shelter deployment might cost less than one involving site preparation, installation, and extended maintenance for modular or manufactured homes. To benchmark this value, one would need to identify comparable contracts awarded for similar disaster magnitudes, geographic areas, and service scopes, ideally those that were competitively procured to establish a market price. The sole-source nature of this award further complicates direct value-for-money comparisons.

What are the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract?

The primary risk with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract is the potential for cost overruns. While the 'fixed fee' component provides the contractor with a predetermined profit margin, the 'cost' portion is reimbursable. If the project encounters unforeseen difficulties, scope creep, or inefficiencies, the total cost to the government can increase significantly beyond initial estimates. For FEMA's disaster recovery operations, which are often conducted under urgent and evolving conditions, the risk of cost escalation is particularly high. Effective oversight, stringent change control, and detailed cost tracking are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the government receives good value. The contractor's incentive is to complete the work, but the government bears the primary financial risk of cost increases.

How effective has FEMA been in managing large-scale construction support contracts post-disaster?

FEMA's effectiveness in managing large-scale construction support contracts post-disaster has been a subject of scrutiny and improvement over the years. Following major events like Hurricane Katrina, significant challenges were identified in contract oversight, cost management, and program delivery, leading to waste and fraud concerns. In response, FEMA has worked to enhance its acquisition processes, improve oversight capabilities, and implement stricter controls. However, the inherent complexities of disaster response—rapid deployment, unpredictable conditions, and the need for immediate solutions—continue to pose management challenges. The success of contracts like this one depends heavily on FEMA's internal capacity for program management, contract administration, and its ability to adapt to the dynamic nature of disaster recovery.

What is the historical spending pattern for FEMA's housing and construction support services?

FEMA's spending on housing and construction support services fluctuates significantly year-to-year, directly correlating with the frequency and severity of declared disasters. In years with major hurricanes, wildfires, or floods, spending can surge into the billions of dollars to address immediate housing needs, debris removal, and infrastructure repair. This includes funding for temporary housing solutions (like manufactured housing units), direct repair programs, and technical assistance contracts for managing these operations. Historical data shows a trend towards utilizing larger, more experienced contractors for complex recovery efforts, often through sole-source or limited competition awards during emergencies. Analyzing FEMA's budget allocations and contract awards over the past decade would reveal peaks in spending following significant disaster years and the types of services most frequently procured.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › DEFENSE (OTHER) R&D

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: CH2M Hill Companies, Ltd. (UEI: 027620574)

Address: 9191 SOUTH JAMAICA STREET, ENGLEWOOD, CO, 06

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,333,493

Exercised Options: $26,333,493

Current Obligation: $26,333,493

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: HSFEHQ05D0592

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline