Department of the Navy awards $26.16M contract for building envelope and interior finishes in North Carolina

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,160,038 ($26.2M)

Contractor: Ameresco Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-07-31

End Date: 2025-08-15

Contract Duration: 1,841 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: FLO - B1016 REPAIR BLDG ENVELOPE&INTERIOR FINISHES

Place of Performance

Location: CHERRY POINT, CRAVEN County, NORTH CAROLINA, 28533

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.2 million to AMERESCO INC for work described as: FLO - B1016 REPAIR BLDG ENVELOPE&INTERIOR FINISHES Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in facility maintenance and upgrades. 2. The fixed-price nature of the contract shifts performance risk to the contractor. 3. A 5-year performance period suggests a need for substantial and ongoing work. 4. The contract is categorized under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. 5. Geographic focus on North Carolina indicates specific regional infrastructure needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $26.16 million over approximately five years suggests a substantial project. Benchmarking against similar large-scale building envelope and interior finish projects for federal facilities is necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. However, the firm-fixed-price structure generally indicates a commitment to a defined cost, which can be advantageous if the scope is well-defined. Without specific cost breakdowns or comparable project data, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging, but the duration implies a consistent need for these services.

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 offers. The presence of 5 bids suggests a reasonably competitive environment for this type of construction service. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a wider selection of qualified contractors, benefiting the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally ensures that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its personnel stationed in North Carolina, who will utilize the improved facilities. The contract delivers essential repair and renovation services for building envelopes and interior finishes, enhancing structural integrity and functionality. The geographic impact is concentrated in North Carolina, supporting local infrastructure and potentially local economic activity through construction. Workforce implications include the employment of skilled tradespeople and construction professionals in the North Carolina region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial building assessments are incomplete, leading to cost overruns despite fixed-price structure.
Ensuring contractor compliance with all federal building codes and environmental regulations throughout the project lifecycle.
Managing the long performance period (over 4 years) to maintain consistent oversight and quality control.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type mitigates cost uncertainty for the government.
Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
The contractor has a significant duration to demonstrate performance and quality.
The contract addresses critical infrastructure needs for facility maintenance and upgrades.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital segment of the construction industry focused on non-residential structures. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services, investing heavily in maintaining and upgrading its vast portfolio of buildings. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale renovation and repair contracts awarded by agencies like the Department of Defense or General Services Administration for similar facility types and geographic regions. The market size for federal construction is substantial, driven by ongoing infrastructure needs and modernization efforts.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity capable of handling the scope and complexity of the project. The absence of specific small business set-aside provisions means that opportunities for small businesses would likely be through subcontracting, if the prime contractor chooses to engage them. Further analysis of the prime contractor's subcontracting plan would be needed to assess the potential impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and their representatives (CORs) within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specified work within the agreed-upon budget. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Building Envelope Repair Contracts
Interior Renovation Projects
Federal Construction Services

Risk Flags

Long performance period may increase risk of material cost escalation.
Potential for scope creep if initial assessments are not thorough.
Ensuring consistent quality control over a multi-year project.
Dependency on contractor performance for critical facility upgrades.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.2 million to AMERESCO INC. FLO - B1016 REPAIR BLDG ENVELOPE&INTERIOR FINISHES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AMERESCO INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-07-31. End: 2025-08-15.

What is the contractor's track record with similar federal building repair and renovation contracts?

AMERESCO INC has a history of performing energy efficiency and facility upgrade projects for federal agencies. While this specific contract focuses on building envelope and interior finishes, their broader experience in facility modernization suggests a capability to manage such projects. A deeper dive into their past performance on contracts of similar size and scope, particularly those involving extensive repairs and renovations, would provide a clearer picture of their reliability and success rate. Reviewing past performance evaluations and any documented issues or commendations would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment of their track record.

How does the awarded amount compare to the estimated cost or initial budget for this project?

The provided data shows the awarded amount of $26.16 million. Without access to the government's initial cost estimates or the solicitation's budget ceiling, it is difficult to directly compare the awarded value to the planned expenditure. However, since this was awarded under full and open competition with 5 bids, it suggests that the market responded competitively. If the awarded price is significantly below the government's estimate, it could indicate efficient pricing or potentially an underestimated scope by the government. Conversely, if it's at or above the estimate, it aligns with market expectations for the required work.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and quality assurance measures for this contract?

While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, firm-fixed-price contracts typically rely on the contractor meeting defined deliverables and specifications. Quality assurance would likely involve regular site inspections, material testing, and adherence to construction standards by government representatives (e.g., CORs). Performance metrics would focus on timely completion of milestones, adherence to the project schedule, and the quality of workmanship in repairing the building envelope and interior finishes. Failure to meet these standards could result in contract modifications, penalties, or termination, depending on the severity.

What is the historical spending trend for building envelope and interior finishes at this specific Navy facility or similar facilities in North Carolina?

Analyzing historical spending for building envelope and interior finishes at this specific Navy facility or comparable facilities in North Carolina would provide valuable context. Without access to historical financial data for this installation or region, it's impossible to determine if $26.16 million over five years represents an increase, decrease, or consistent level of investment. Such analysis would help identify patterns of deferred maintenance versus proactive upgrades and assess whether current spending aligns with long-term facility management strategies. It could also reveal if this contract is addressing a backlog of repairs or a planned modernization initiative.

What are the potential risks associated with the long performance period (1841 days)?

A long performance period of 1841 days (approximately 5 years) for building envelope and interior finishes presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's an increased risk of material price escalation over such a long duration, although the firm-fixed-price contract aims to mitigate this for the government. Secondly, maintaining consistent quality control and oversight across multiple years can be challenging for the government. Thirdly, unforeseen site conditions or changes in building codes or environmental regulations could necessitate scope adjustments, potentially leading to disputes or change orders. Finally, contractor performance could degrade over time if not actively managed and monitored.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N4008519R9048

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 111 SPEEN ST STE 410, FRAMINGHAM, MA, 01701

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,160,038

Exercised Options: $26,160,038

Current Obligation: $26,160,038

Actual Outlays: $2,146,626

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N4008520D0032

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline