DoD's $131M Ship Island Restoration Project Faces Potential Cost Overruns Amidst Limited Small Business Participation
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $131,254,698 ($131.3M)
Contractor: Weeks Marine, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2018-08-07
End Date: 2020-03-22
Contract Duration: 593 days
Daily Burn Rate: $221.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: MSCIP COMPREHENSIVE BARRIER ISLAND RESTORATION PROJECT, SHIP ISLAND PHASE 2, HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
Place of Performance
Location: GULFPORT, HARRISON County, MISSISSIPPI, 39501
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $131.3 million to WEEKS MARINE, INC. for work described as: MSCIP COMPREHENSIVE BARRIER ISLAND RESTORATION PROJECT, SHIP ISLAND PHASE 2, HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI Key points: 1. The project's final cost of $131.25 million significantly exceeded initial estimates, indicating potential scope creep or unforeseen challenges. 2. Weeks Marine, Inc. secured the contract through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The absence of small business participation raises concerns about equitable opportunity and potential missed cost savings. 4. The project falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, which can be prone to complex logistical and environmental risks.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The final award of $131.25 million appears high compared to the initial bid of $22.13 million, suggesting significant cost increases during the contract period. Further analysis is needed to determine if these increases were justified by scope changes or market conditions.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded through full and open competition, which typically fosters competitive pricing. However, the substantial increase from the initial bid to the final award warrants scrutiny to ensure the price discovery mechanism remained effective throughout the project's lifecycle.
Taxpayer Impact: The significant cost increase over the initial bid suggests taxpayers may have funded unforeseen expenses or scope expansions, impacting the overall value for money.
Public Impact
Environmental restoration projects are crucial for ecological health and coastal resilience, but their high costs require careful management. The lack of small business involvement in a large federal contract can limit economic opportunities for smaller firms. Transparency in cost overruns is vital for public trust and accountability in government spending.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Significant cost increase from initial bid to final award.
- No small business participation noted.
- Long project duration (593 days) increases risk exposure.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition.
- Contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which can offer cost certainty if managed well.
Sector Analysis
This project falls under heavy and civil engineering construction, a sector often characterized by large-scale infrastructure development and environmental considerations. Benchmarks for similar coastal restoration projects would be necessary for a precise comparison, but costs can vary widely based on scope and location.
Small Business Impact
The absence of small business participation in this large federal contract is a notable concern. While full and open competition was utilized, strategies to encourage or set aside portions for small businesses could have potentially increased competition and fostered economic development.
Oversight & Accountability
The Department of the Army, as the procuring agency, is responsible for oversight. The significant cost increase warrants a review of contract management practices and justification for the additional funding to ensure accountability and prevent future cost escalations.
Related Government Programs
- Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Department of the Army Programs
Risk Flags
- Significant cost overrun compared to initial bid.
- Lack of small business participation.
- Long project duration.
- Potential for underbidding in initial solicitation.
- Environmental projects are inherently complex and subject to external factors.
Tags
other-heavy-and-civil-engineering-constr, department-of-defense, ms, definitive-contract, 100m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $131.3 million to WEEKS MARINE, INC.. MSCIP COMPREHENSIVE BARRIER ISLAND RESTORATION PROJECT, SHIP ISLAND PHASE 2, HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is WEEKS MARINE, 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 $131.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2018-08-07. End: 2020-03-22.
What specific factors contributed to the nearly six-fold increase in project cost from the initial bid to the final award?
The substantial cost increase from $22.13 million to $131.25 million likely stems from a combination of factors. These could include unforeseen site conditions, changes in project scope or environmental requirements during execution, material cost escalations, extended project timelines due to weather or logistical challenges, and potentially underbidding in the initial solicitation. A detailed post-award review would be necessary to pinpoint the exact drivers.
How does the lack of small business participation impact the overall cost-effectiveness and innovation potential of this project?
The absence of small business participation may limit the diversity of solutions and potentially reduce competitive pressure, which can sometimes lead to higher costs. Small businesses often bring specialized expertise and can be more agile, potentially offering innovative approaches or cost efficiencies. Their exclusion might mean foregoing these benefits, although the contract was awarded via full and open competition, suggesting larger firms were deemed most capable.
What oversight mechanisms were in place to manage the significant cost growth and ensure the project's effectiveness in achieving its restoration goals?
Effective oversight typically involves regular progress reviews, change order management, and performance monitoring against contract requirements. For this project, the significant cost growth suggests that either the initial oversight was insufficient to control scope creep and unforeseen issues, or the challenges encountered were exceptionally complex and costly. A thorough review of the Army Corps of Engineers' contract management and quality assurance processes during this project is warranted.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE GOVT OWNED BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID
Solicitation ID: W9127818B0001
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Weeks Marine Inc (UEI: 044665230)
Address: 304 GAILLE DR, COVINGTON, LA, 70433
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $131,254,698
Exercised Options: $131,254,698
Current Obligation: $131,254,698
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 132
Total Subaward Amount: $35,232,703
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2018-08-07
Current End Date: 2020-03-22
Potential End Date: 2020-03-22 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2020-10-03
More Contracts from Weeks Marine, Inc.
- Savannah Inner Harbor Unclassified and Maintenance Dredging Reaches 0+000 to 70+000 Reaches C, D,&E — $144.9M (Department of Defense)
- 200409!113803!1700!C2472 !naval Facilities Engineering Com!n6247202c0018 !A!N! !N! ! !20040610!20070616!044665230!044665230!044665230!n!weeks Marine,Inc !4 Commerce Drive !cranford !nj!07016!14530!025!34!colts Neck !monmouth !NEW Jersey!+000022008984!n!n!000263792640!y222!highways, Roads, Streets, Bridges and Railways !C2 !construction !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!u!j!2!012!b! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!b!y! !N! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $143.1M (Department of Defense)
- Beachfill, Initial Construction, Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet, Ocean County, NJ — $131.4M (Department of Defense)
- Dredging and Constructions for the Large Scale Marsh Creation: Upper Barataria Component (BA-207) for Noaa Fisheries, Office of Habitat Conservation, Restoration Center, Deepwater Horizon (DWH) Program — $120.8M (Department of Commerce)
- P391, Pier 3 Replacement and Gosport 35KV Distribution to Piers — $90.6M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)