DoD's $51.7M contract for building revitalization awarded to Chugach World Services, Inc. without competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $51,754,466 ($51.8M)

Contractor: Chugach World Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-07-16

End Date: 2011-06-13

Contract Duration: 697 days

Daily Burn Rate: $74.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: REVITALIZATION OF BUILDING 2266 AND 2264

Place of Performance

Location: SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR County, TEXAS, 78234

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $51.8 million to CHUGACH WORLD SERVICES, INC. for work described as: REVITALIZATION OF BUILDING 2266 AND 2264 Key points: 1. The contract's value of $51.7 million represents a significant investment in facility upgrades. 2. Awarded on a sole-source basis, the lack of competition raises questions about potential price overruns and value for money. 3. The contract duration of 697 days suggests a substantial scope of work for the revitalization project. 4. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but the absence of competition limits benchmarking. 5. The project's focus on building revitalization indicates a need for infrastructure maintenance and modernization within the Department of the Army. 6. The contractor, Chugach World Services, Inc., has a track record with federal contracts, warranting a review of past performance. 7. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this was not specifically targeted for small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this $51.7 million contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to ascertain if the price reflects fair market value or if taxpayers received optimal value. The fixed-price contract type offers some cost control, but the lack of competition means there's no direct comparison to other firms' pricing for similar revitalization projects. Further analysis would require access to detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons with industry benchmarks for similar construction and renovation work.

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 only one vendor possesses the necessary qualifications, or in specific circumstances where competition is not feasible or advantageous. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to achieve the best possible price and terms. It also means that potential savings that could arise from a competitive bidding process were not realized.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may not have benefited from the cost savings typically achieved through a bidding process. This could result in a higher overall expenditure for the government compared to a competed contract.

Public Impact

Military personnel and civilian employees stationed at the Department of the Army facility will benefit from improved and modernized building infrastructure. The services delivered include the revitalization of Buildings 2266 and 2264, likely encompassing structural repairs, system upgrades, and aesthetic improvements. The geographic impact is localized to the specific Army installation in Texas where the buildings are located. The contract supports jobs within the construction sector, potentially benefiting skilled trades and related support services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs for taxpayers.
Sole-source awards can limit innovation and efficiency gains from market competition.
Performance risks are concentrated with a single contractor without competitive pressure.
Transparency in pricing and justification for sole-source award could be enhanced.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contractor, Chugach World Services, Inc., is responsible for delivering the full scope of work.
The project addresses critical infrastructure needs for the Department of the Army.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building, alteration, or repairing of nonresidential structures. The market size for federal construction projects is substantial, driven by the need to maintain and modernize aging government facilities. This specific contract for building revitalization fits within the government's ongoing efforts to ensure its infrastructure is safe, functional, and up-to-date, aligning with broader trends in facility management and capital investment.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the procurement process did not prioritize small business participation, either as prime contractors or through specific subcontracting goals. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award is likely minimal. However, it is possible that the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors, though this is not explicitly detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency regarding the sole-source justification and the contractor's performance would be managed through federal procurement regulations and reporting requirements. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense may also have jurisdiction for audits and investigations if any concerns regarding waste, fraud, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Maintenance
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
Federal Building Renovation Programs
Infrastructure Modernization Initiatives

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
Potential for cost overruns due to lack of competition.
Limited transparency on pricing and value for money.
Contract duration is substantial, requiring close monitoring.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $51.8 million to CHUGACH WORLD SERVICES, INC.. REVITALIZATION OF BUILDING 2266 AND 2264

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CHUGACH WORLD SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $51.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-16. End: 2011-06-13.

What is the track record of Chugach World Services, Inc. with federal contracts, particularly in building revitalization?

Chugach World Services, Inc. has a history of performing federal contracts, including those related to facility maintenance and construction. While specific details on past building revitalization projects are not provided in this data snippet, their involvement in government contracts suggests experience in meeting federal requirements. A comprehensive review would involve examining their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any past disputes or contract terminations, and the scale and complexity of previously awarded projects. Understanding their performance on similar projects, especially those awarded on a sole-source basis, would provide crucial context for assessing the risk and potential success of this current contract.

How does the $51.7 million cost compare to similar building revitalization projects within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies?

Direct comparison of the $51.7 million cost is difficult without knowing the specific scope, size, and condition of Buildings 2266 and 2264, and the extent of the 'revitalization' work. However, for context, major federal building renovation projects can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars depending on the scale. For example, large-scale renovations of military barracks or administrative buildings can easily exceed $50 million. The absence of competition for this contract prevents a direct price benchmark against other potential bidders. To assess value, one would need to compare the cost per square foot, the types of upgrades included (e.g., HVAC, electrical, structural), and the expected lifespan extension against industry averages for similar federal facility modernization efforts.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding a contract of this magnitude on a sole-source basis?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude ($51.7 million) include potential overpayment due to the lack of competitive pricing pressure, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or achieve maximum efficiency, and a higher risk of contractor underperformance without the threat of losing out to a competitor. There's also a risk that the government may not have explored all viable options or that the justification for sole-source was not sufficiently robust. Furthermore, without competition, it's harder to independently verify that the chosen contractor is the most capable or offers the best value proposition. This necessitates heightened oversight and rigorous performance management to mitigate these inherent risks.

What is the expected effectiveness of this revitalization project in terms of improving facility functionality and longevity?

The effectiveness of the revitalization project hinges on the detailed scope of work outlined in the contract, which is not fully detailed here. However, the stated purpose of 'revitalization' implies a significant upgrade aimed at restoring or enhancing the buildings' functionality, safety, and operational lifespan. If the project addresses critical infrastructure deficiencies (e.g., outdated electrical systems, HVAC, structural integrity) and incorporates modern building standards, it should lead to improved energy efficiency, reduced maintenance costs, enhanced occupant comfort and safety, and a significantly extended service life for Buildings 2266 and 2264. The success will ultimately be measured by the contractor's adherence to specifications and the long-term performance of the renovated facilities.

How does this $51.7 million contract fit into the historical spending patterns for building maintenance and construction within the Department of the Army?

This $51.7 million contract represents a significant, albeit singular, investment in building revitalization. Historical spending patterns for the Department of the Army (DoA) typically show substantial annual budgets allocated to facilities sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM). While this single contract is large, it needs to be viewed within the broader context of the DoA's overall infrastructure budget, which often runs into billions of dollars annually across all its installations. Such revitalization contracts are crucial for addressing deferred maintenance and upgrading aging infrastructure, which is a persistent challenge for military branches. This specific award could be part of a larger, multi-year strategy to address deficiencies in specific installations or building types.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT OF RESTORATION ACTIVITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W9126G09R0095

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Chugach Alaska Corporation (UEI: 071844021)

Address: 3800 CENTERPOINT DR STE 601, ANCHORAGE, AK, 00

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Emerging Small Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $59,305,131

Exercised Options: $51,754,466

Current Obligation: $51,754,466

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline