MacDill AFB clinic construction contract awarded to Caddell Construction for over $47M, completed on time

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $47,120,054 ($47.1M)

Contractor: Caddell Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-07-12

End Date: 2011-10-01

Contract Duration: 1,542 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION - CLINIC REPLACEMENT: CONSTRUCT A NEW MULTI-STORY MEDICAL CLINIC, MACDILL AFB, FLORIDA

Place of Performance

Location: TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH County, FLORIDA, 33608

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $47.1 million to CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCTION - CLINIC REPLACEMENT: CONSTRUCT A NEW MULTI-STORY MEDICAL CLINIC, MACDILL AFB, FLORIDA Key points: 1. The contract achieved its objectives within the allocated budget, indicating effective cost management. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing. 3. The project's on-time completion mitigates risks associated with schedule delays and cost overruns. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, promoting cost certainty for the government. 5. The project falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a common area for federal spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The final award amount of $47.12 million for the multi-story medical clinic at MacDill AFB appears reasonable given the scope of constructing a significant medical facility. Benchmarking against similar large-scale federal construction projects would provide a more precise value assessment. The firm fixed-price structure generally leads to predictable costs, assuming no significant change orders.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to bid. With three bids received, the level of competition appears moderate, suggesting that the government likely received competitive pricing. The process allowed for a broad range of potential offerors to participate.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and encourage innovation from contractors.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families at MacDill AFB will benefit from improved medical facilities. The construction project provided employment opportunities within the construction sector in Florida. The new clinic enhances the healthcare infrastructure supporting the military base. The project's completion ensures continued access to essential medical services for the base community.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if change orders were extensive, though the fixed-price contract aims to limit this.
Ensuring the quality of construction meets long-term durability and healthcare facility standards.

Positive Signals

On-time completion suggests effective project management and execution by the contractor.
The use of a firm fixed-price contract provided cost certainty.
Award under full and open competition indicates a fair and transparent procurement process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of federal spending. This sector encompasses the building of facilities like hospitals, schools, and government offices. Federal spending in this area is often driven by the need to maintain, upgrade, or replace aging infrastructure and to provide necessary facilities for government operations and personnel across various agencies.

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 focus was on securing the best overall offer from the competitive market, rather than prioritizing small business participation through set-asides.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this construction contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and their representatives within the Department of the Army. Quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs) would likely have been in place to monitor construction progress, adherence to specifications, and overall quality. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and public reporting mechanisms.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Healthcare Facility Construction
Department of Defense Facilities
Base Infrastructure Improvements

Risk Flags

Potential for unforeseen site conditions impacting schedule or cost.
Ensuring compliance with specialized medical facility construction standards.
Adequate quality assurance and inspection protocols for construction.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $47.1 million to CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. CONSTRUCTION - CLINIC REPLACEMENT: CONSTRUCT A NEW MULTI-STORY MEDICAL CLINIC, MACDILL AFB, FLORIDA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CADDELL CONSTRUCTION CO., 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 $47.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-07-12. End: 2011-10-01.

What was the track record of Caddell Construction Co., Inc. with similar federal construction projects prior to this award?

Prior to this $47.12 million contract for the MacDill AFB clinic, Caddell Construction Co., Inc. had a history of performing large-scale federal construction projects, particularly for the Department of Defense. Their portfolio often includes military barracks, training facilities, and other critical infrastructure. A detailed review of their past performance, including any past performance evaluations and any instances of disputes or contract modifications on similar projects, would be necessary to fully assess their suitability and reliability for this specific medical clinic construction. Federal procurement systems often maintain records of contractor performance that can be consulted for such an assessment.

How does the final award amount compare to the initial estimated cost for the clinic construction?

The provided data does not include the initial estimated cost for the clinic construction, making a direct comparison to the final award amount of $47.12 million impossible. However, the fact that the contract was awarded under full and open competition with three bids suggests that the bids received were likely within a reasonable range of the government's estimate. If the final award was significantly lower than the estimate, it could indicate successful cost competition. Conversely, if it was higher, it might suggest an underestimation or evolving project requirements.

What were the primary risk indicators identified during the procurement and execution phases of this contract?

Key risk indicators for this contract would have included potential construction delays due to unforeseen site conditions, weather impacts in Florida, or labor shortages. Given it's a medical facility, ensuring compliance with stringent healthcare building codes and specialized equipment installation requirements presented a significant technical risk. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract shifts financial risk to the contractor, but risks related to contractor performance, quality control, and adherence to schedule were still present. The moderate competition (3 bidders) could also be seen as a minor risk if it suggested limited market interest or potential for collusion, though this is less likely in full and open competition.

How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring value for money for this project?

The use of full and open competition is generally considered an effective method for ensuring value for money in federal contracting. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, the government maximizes the potential for receiving competitive pricing. In this case, with three bids received for the $47.12 million contract, there was a degree of competition that likely helped drive the price down. The final award amount, coupled with the on-time completion, suggests that the competitive process was reasonably effective in securing a good outcome for the government and taxpayers.

What is the historical spending trend for similar medical clinic construction projects by the Department of the Army?

Historical spending on similar medical clinic construction projects by the Department of the Army can vary significantly based on the size, complexity, and location of the facilities. Over the years, the Army, like other branches of the DoD, has invested substantial amounts in upgrading and expanding its healthcare infrastructure to support military readiness and personnel well-being. Spending trends are influenced by factors such as military base consolidation or expansion, evolving healthcare needs, and federal budget allocations for military construction (MILCON). Analyzing specific past projects of comparable scale and function would reveal trends in cost per square foot, project durations, and common contracting approaches.

Were there any significant contract modifications or change orders issued during the contract period?

The provided summary data does not detail specific contract modifications or change orders issued during the contract period (July 2007 to October 2011). However, for a large construction project of this magnitude ($47.12 million), it is common for some modifications to occur to address unforeseen site conditions, minor design adjustments, or scope clarifications. The key factor for value would be whether these modifications significantly increased the contract price or extended the duration beyond the original intent, and how effectively they were managed under the firm fixed-price structure.

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

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2700 LAGOON PARK DR, MONTGOMERY, AL, 36109

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $80,010,011

Exercised Options: $80,010,011

Current Obligation: $47,120,054

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline