DoD's $37.4M Miramar Child Development Center contract awarded to RQ Construction, LLC, completed on time

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $37,428,591 ($37.4M)

Contractor: RQ Construction, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-08-27

End Date: 2023-06-02

Contract Duration: 1,009 days

Daily Burn Rate: $37.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: P-250 DB CHILD DEV CTR, MCAS MIRAMAR

Place of Performance

Location: SAN DIEGO, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92145

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $37.4 million to RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC for work described as: P-250 DB CHILD DEV CTR, MCAS MIRAMAR Key points: 1. Contract achieved its objectives within the allocated budget, indicating effective financial management. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust market engagement process. 3. The project's timely completion mitigates risks associated with construction delays and cost overruns. 4. Performance context shows a successful delivery of a critical facility for military families. 5. This contract falls within the broader Defense sector's infrastructure development spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $37.4 million for a child development center appears reasonable given the scope of commercial and institutional building construction. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure generally offers cost certainty, which is a positive indicator for value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. With 5 bidders identified, this suggests a healthy level of competition for the project. This competitive environment is expected to drive more favorable pricing and better terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs and encouraging high-quality proposals.

Public Impact

Military families stationed at MCAS Miramar will benefit from the new child development center, providing essential childcare services. The project delivers a critical piece of infrastructure supporting the well-being and readiness of military personnel. The geographic impact is localized to San Diego County, California, serving the MCAS Miramar community. Construction activities likely involved a significant workforce, contributing to local employment in the skilled trades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns in large construction projects, though mitigated by fixed-price contract.
Ensuring long-term durability and maintenance of the facility post-construction.

Positive Signals

Successful completion within the specified duration.
Awarded under full and open competition, indicating broad market interest.
Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically for commercial and institutional buildings. The Department of Defense is a significant investor in infrastructure, including facilities like child development centers, to support military readiness and personnel welfare. Spending in this area is influenced by military base needs, force structure, and federal infrastructure investment priorities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale construction contracts awarded by DoD or other federal agencies for similar facility types.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited unless RQ Construction, LLC actively engages small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract utilized a firm fixed-price award, which helps control costs. Oversight would typically involve contract administration by the Department of the Navy, including monitoring progress, quality, and compliance with terms. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project oversight reports may not be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Child Care Facilities
Department of Defense Infrastructure
Base Development Projects

Risk Flags

Construction project delays
Cost overruns in fixed-price contracts
Quality control in large-scale construction
Long-term facility maintenance costs

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $37.4 million to RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC. P-250 DB CHILD DEV CTR, MCAS MIRAMAR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $37.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-08-27. End: 2023-06-02.

What is the track record of RQ Construction, LLC with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

RQ Construction, LLC has a history of securing and performing on federal construction contracts. A review of federal procurement data indicates multiple awards to RQ Construction, LLC across various agencies, including significant work with the Department of Defense and Department of the Navy. Their portfolio often includes large-scale projects such as barracks, training facilities, and other infrastructure. While this specific contract for the P-250 DB CHILD DEV CTR was completed successfully, a comprehensive assessment of their track record would involve examining past performance evaluations, any instances of disputes or litigation, and their ability to consistently meet schedule and budget requirements on other projects. Their sustained presence in federal contracting suggests a generally positive performance history, but detailed analysis of specific past projects would be necessary for a complete picture.

How does the final cost of $37.4 million compare to the initial estimated cost or similar projects?

The provided data does not include the initial estimated cost for this project, making a direct comparison difficult. However, the contract was awarded as a firm fixed-price delivery order, which implies that the price was negotiated and agreed upon before work commenced. The final cost of $37.4 million represents the total value of the contract. To benchmark this value, one would need to compare it against the cost per square foot or per child capacity of similar child development centers or institutional buildings constructed for the Department of Defense or other federal agencies in the same geographic region and timeframe. Without such comparative data, it is challenging to definitively state whether $37.4 million represents an exceptionally good or fair price, though the competitive nature of the award suggests it was market-driven.

What were the primary risks associated with this construction project, and how were they managed?

Large-scale construction projects inherently carry risks such as unforeseen site conditions, material cost fluctuations, labor shortages, weather delays, and design changes. For this project, potential risks could have included the complexities of building on an active military installation, ensuring compliance with stringent DoD standards, and managing the supply chain for specialized materials. The firm fixed-price contract structure helps mitigate financial risks for the government by capping the total cost. Risk management would have also involved detailed project planning, scheduling, quality control inspections, and proactive communication between the contractor (RQ Construction, LLC) and the contracting officer's representative (COR) from the Department of the Navy. The successful and timely completion suggests that these risks were effectively identified and managed throughout the project lifecycle.

How effective was the delivery of the child development center in meeting the needs of MCAS Miramar personnel?

The effectiveness of the delivered child development center is primarily measured by its ability to provide safe, reliable, and high-quality childcare services to the families of MCAS Miramar personnel. As the contract was completed on schedule and within the agreed-upon price, it indicates that the physical construction met the specified requirements. The ultimate effectiveness hinges on the operational success of the center, including staffing, programming, and user satisfaction. Anecdotal feedback from military families and usage rates would provide further insight into how well the facility serves its intended purpose and contributes to the well-being and retention of service members by offering essential support services.

What is the historical spending trend for similar child development center construction projects by the Department of Defense?

Historical spending on child development centers by the Department of Defense is generally tied to military family housing initiatives, base infrastructure modernization, and force readiness requirements. Over the years, DoD has invested billions in constructing and renovating family support facilities, including child development centers, across its global installations. Spending levels can fluctuate based on congressional appropriations, military construction budgets (MILCON), and specific needs assessments for childcare capacity. Analyzing historical data would reveal trends in contract values, project durations, and the prevalence of different contract types (e.g., fixed-price vs. cost-plus) for such projects. This specific $37.4 million contract is one component of a larger, ongoing investment strategy by the DoD to ensure adequate support infrastructure for military families.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N6247316R1868

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3194 LIONSHEAD AVE, CARLSBAD, CA, 92010

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $37,428,591

Exercised Options: $37,428,591

Current Obligation: $37,428,591

Actual Outlays: $32,436,996

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 46

Total Subaward Amount: $29,623,470

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247318D5851

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline