State Department's $38.4M Design/Build Housing Complex Contract Awarded to Framaco-Epik-Metis JV

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $38,398,709 ($38.4M)

Contractor: Framaco- Epik- Metis F E M, JV

Awarding Agency: Department of State

Start Date: 2006-12-29

End Date: 2012-01-13

Contract Duration: 1,841 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: DESIGN/BUILD HOUSING COMPLEX.

Plain-Language Summary

Department of State obligated $38.4 million to FRAMACO- EPIK- METIS F E M, JV for work described as: DESIGN/BUILD HOUSING COMPLEX. Key points: 1. The contract utilized a firm-fixed-price structure, aiming to control costs for the government. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract was 1841 days, indicating a significant project timeline. 4. The project involved the construction of a housing complex, a critical infrastructure need. 5. The contractor is a joint venture, potentially indicating a specialized team for this project.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of approximately $38.4 million for a design/build housing complex appears within a reasonable range for large-scale construction projects. However, without specific details on the scope of work, location, and quality standards, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar government housing projects, considering inflation and regional construction costs, would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to lock in costs, but potential change orders could impact the final expenditure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. This typically leads to a more competitive environment, encouraging bidders to offer their best pricing and technical solutions to win the contract. The presence of four bidders (no=4) suggests a reasonable level of interest and competition for this project.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices and ensuring the government receives the best possible value for its investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely Department of State personnel who will be housed in the new complex. The project delivers essential housing infrastructure, supporting diplomatic missions and personnel stationed abroad. The geographic impact is specific to the location where the housing complex is constructed, likely an overseas post. The construction phase will create jobs for skilled and unskilled labor in the relevant geographic area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract does not adequately account for unforeseen construction challenges or material price fluctuations.
Risk associated with the joint venture structure; performance may depend on the coordination and capabilities of the individual member companies.
Long project duration increases exposure to changing geopolitical conditions or security concerns at the project site.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
Firm-fixed-price contract type helps to establish cost certainty for the government.
The project addresses a clear need for housing infrastructure for government personnel.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector. This sector is characterized by large-scale projects requiring significant capital investment, specialized labor, and complex project management. The market size for federal construction contracts is substantial, with agencies like the Department of State frequently undertaking infrastructure projects, particularly for overseas facilities. This specific contract for a design/build housing complex represents a significant investment in supporting government personnel and operations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb=false) and there is no information on subcontracting plans (st=""). This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity or joint venture, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific prime contract is likely minimal. However, the joint venture structure itself might involve smaller specialized firms as subcontractors, though this is not explicitly detailed.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of State's contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified housing complex. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Department of State Overseas Buildings Operations
Federal Construction Contracts
Design-Build Projects
Government Housing Facilities

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if design-build process is not tightly managed.
Contractor performance risk associated with joint venture structure.
Geopolitical or security risks at overseas construction site.
Material cost escalation impacting fixed-price contract.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of State awarded $38.4 million to FRAMACO- EPIK- METIS F E M, JV. DESIGN/BUILD HOUSING COMPLEX.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FRAMACO- EPIK- METIS F E M, JV.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of State (Department of State).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $38.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-12-29. End: 2012-01-13.

What specific design and construction standards were mandated for this housing complex, and how do they compare to similar federal housing projects?

The provided data does not detail the specific design and construction standards mandated for this housing complex. Typically, federal construction projects, especially those for overseas posts managed by the Department of State, adhere to stringent building codes, security requirements, and sustainability standards. These standards often exceed those of typical commercial projects due to the unique operational and security environments. A comparative analysis would require access to the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and any incorporated technical specifications. Benchmarking against other State Department housing projects or similar embassy infrastructure would reveal if the standards employed here are typical, more rigorous, or less demanding, impacting cost and long-term durability.

How did the final cost of the contract compare to the initial estimated cost, if available, and what factors contributed to any variance?

The provided data does not include information on the initial estimated cost or the final cost of the contract, only the awarded amount of $38,398,709.07. For firm-fixed-price contracts, the awarded amount is intended to be the ceiling cost, barring significant change orders. To assess cost variance, one would need to compare the awarded amount to any pre-solicitation estimates or proposals received. Factors contributing to variance in fixed-price contracts often stem from scope changes initiated by the government, unforeseen site conditions, or escalation in material and labor costs if not adequately hedged by the contractor. Without these details, it's impossible to determine if the project was completed within budget expectations.

What is the track record of the joint venture partners (Framaco, Epik, Metis) in executing similar large-scale federal construction projects, particularly design-build contracts?

The provided data identifies the contractor as 'FRAMACO- EPIK- METIS F E M, JV' but does not offer details on the individual track records of Framaco, Epik, or Metis, nor their history as a joint venture. A thorough assessment would require researching each entity's past performance on federal contracts, specifically looking for experience with design-build projects, housing complexes, and projects of similar magnitude and complexity, especially in overseas environments if applicable. Past performance evaluations, contract close-out data, and any reported disputes or successes would be crucial indicators of their capability to successfully execute this housing complex project. The joint venture structure itself might be a strategy to pool expertise, but the success hinges on the combined capabilities and management of the partners.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this design/build housing complex contract, and how was performance monitored?

The provided data does not specify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, for a design-build housing complex, typical KPIs would likely include adherence to the project schedule (dur=1841 days), compliance with design specifications and quality standards, meeting safety regulations during construction, and the final functionality and habitability of the completed housing units. Performance monitoring by the Department of State would involve regular site inspections, review of progress reports, quality assurance checks, and potentially formal performance evaluations at key milestones and upon completion. The firm-fixed-price nature implies that meeting the defined scope within the awarded price is a primary performance metric.

How does the spending on this specific housing complex contract compare to the Department of State's overall budget allocation for facilities construction and maintenance over the contract period?

The data provided focuses solely on this individual contract ($38.4 million awarded in 2006, ending in 2012) and does not offer information on the Department of State's overall budget for facilities construction and maintenance during that period. To make a comparison, one would need to access the Department of State's historical budget documents and identify the specific appropriations for construction, family housing, or overseas facilities. This contract's value represents a portion of the agency's spending on infrastructure. Understanding the total budget would contextualize whether this project was a significant investment relative to the agency's overall facilities management expenditures or a routine project within a larger capital improvement program.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: SALMEC-06-R0097

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 800 WESTCHESTER, STE S-430, PORT CHESTER, NY, 16

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $38,398,709

Exercised Options: $38,398,709

Current Obligation: $38,398,709

Timeline